ΠΕΡΙ 


AHMHTPIOY 


“yh x .- ~ TEER SRN 


ere dewensemromduars bios ΜΗ TAB INTRA. 
Sree at behead tr i eee cpert 


ia 


sata tect fate 


ἘΠΕῚ ΠῚ 


"TRINITY COLLEGE 
LIBRARY 


DURHAM : NORTH CAROLINA 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2017 with funding from 
Duke University Libraries 


https://archive.org/details/demetriusonstyle01deme 


DEV RuCSe ONS PVE: 


Zondon: C. J. CLAY anp SONS, 
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
AVE MARIA LANE. 

Glasgow: 50, WELLINGTON STREET. 


Leipsig: F. A. BROCKHAUS. 
few Work: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 
Bombay and Calcutta: MACMILLAN AND CO., Lrp. 


[All Rights reserved.) 


Pee wRIUS ON STYLE 


THE GREEK TEXT OF 
DEMETRIUS DE ZLOCUTIONE 


EDITED AFTER THE PARIS MANUSCRIPT 


WITH 


INTRODUCTION, TRANSLATION, FACSIMILES, ETC. 


BY 


ΝΕ πε RODE RAS. slernr ΡΣ 


PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN THE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF NORTH WALES, BANGOR 
LATE FELLOW OF KING’S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE; EDITOR OF “LONGINUS 
ON THE SUBLIME’ AND OF ‘DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS: 
THE THREE LITERARY LETTERS’. 


CAMBRIDGE: 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
1902 


ae Nae) 


Cambridge : 


PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY, 
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 


λέξεως δὲ ἀρετὴ σαφῆ καὶ μὴ ταπεινὴν εἶναι. 


ARISTOT. Poet. xxii. I. 


IVVENTVTI 
LVCIDE SCRIBENDI AC VENVSTE 
STVDIOSAE 
HANC EDITIONEM 


ἐπτόηται yap ἅπασα νέου ψυχὴ περὶ 
τὸν τῆς ἑρμηνείας ὡραϊσμόν. 


Dionys. Hat. de Comp. Verb. ς. τ. 


διὸ δεῖ λανθάνειν ποιοῦντας, καὶ μὴ δοκεῖν λέγειν πεπλασμένως ἀλλὰ πεφυκότως. 
τοῦτο γὰρ πιθανόν, ἐκεῖνο δὲ τοὐναντίον᾽ ws γὰρ πρὸς ἐπιβουλεύοντα διαβάλλονται, 
καθάπερ πρὸς τοὺς οἴνους τοὺς μεμιγμένους. 
ARISTOT. (het. ili. 2, 4. 


And if I have done well, and as is fitting the story, tt 1s that which I desired: 
but 17) slenderly and meanly, it ts that which I could attain unto. For as it is 
hurtful to drink wine or water alone; and as wine mingled with water is 
Pleasant and delighteth the taste: even so speech finely framed delighteth the ears 
of them that read the story. And here shall be an end. 


2 Maccabees xv. 38, 39. 


Cur igitur tus cevile docere semper pulchrum fuit hominumgue clarissimorum 
discipulis floruerunt domus: ad dicendum si quis acuat aut adiuvet in eo tuven- 


tutem, vituperetur ? 
Cic. Orator 41, 142. 


And now lastly will be the time to read with them those organic arts which 
enable men to discourse and write perspicuously, elegantly, and according to the 
fitted style of lofty, mean, or lowly. Logic, therefore, so much as ts useful, ts to 
be referred to this due place with all her well-couched heads and topics, until 22 
be time to open her contracted palm into a graceful and ornate rhetoric, taught 
out of the rule of Plato, Aristotle, Phalereus, Cigero, Hermogenes, Longinus. 


MiLTon, Zractate of Education. 


Possum etiam hoc vere de illo libro [sc. περὶ ἑρμηνείας] praedicare, me neminem 
eorum inuenisse, cum quibus ipsum diligenter legi (legi autem cum multis, et tis 
quidem magno imgenio ac tudicéo praeditis hominibus) gui non ipsum statim 


amaverint ac magnopere admzrati sint. 
PIETRO VETTORI. 


On livre gui mériterait de devenir classique. 


EMILE. EGGER. 


Die goldene Schrift des Demetrios περὶ ἑρμηνείας. 
ULRICH VON WILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDORFF. 


ΟΣ ΠΕΣ 


7ν the first of the two verses which end his ‘story’ the 
author of the Second Book of Maccabees has sometimes been 
thought to be imitating the conclusion of Aeschines’ Speech 
against Ctesiphon; in the second it is possible, but hardly 
probable, that he has in mind the passage of Aristotle's Rhetoric 
which 15 printed, together with his own words, at the head of 
the mottos given on the opposite page. Aristotle seems to refer, 
in the wlustration he incidentally employs, not to the mixture of 
the wine of style with the water of natural expression, but 
rather to the heady drink made by mingling one wine with 
another. {is main point 1s that good writing should so skil- 
fully combine art with nature that the combination shall escape 
detection. Still more happily does Shakespeare, drawing his 
metaphor from the process of growth rather than of fusion, 
proclaim the essential unity of art and nature :— 


Yet nature is made better by no mean 

But nature makes that mean: so, over that art 
Which you say adds to nature, 7s an art 

That nature makes. You see, sweet maid, we marry 
A gentler scion to the wildest stock, 

And make conceive a bark of baser kind 

By bud of nobler race: this ts an art 

Which does mend nature, change it rather, but 


The art itself 7s nature. 
Winter’s Tale, iv. 4. 


Vili PREFACE 


In offering an old treatise on style to modern British youths, 
one can quote no more striking reminder of the fact, which 
young writers are peculiarly apt to forget, that art is something 
other. than an ostentatious eccentricity. 

While the two first mottos are thus intended to suggest 
(when supplemented by Shakespeare's lines) the broad truth that 
art is the handmaid and not the rival of nature, the remainder 
have a more restricted bearing. Cicero asks his practical 
Jellow-countrymen why traiming in the art of expression should 
not find its due place in the education of the young; and Milton 
sketches a course of instruction in rhetoric which includes the 
present treatise on style under the name of ‘ Phalereus’ (or 
Demetrius of Phalerum), to whom it was traditionally at- 
tributed. Milton's high estimate of this work was anticipated 
during the Renaissance by its distinguished Florentine editor 
Pietro Vettori; and in modern times it has been endorsed by 
French and German scholars. So that there seems good cause 
for presenting the treatise, now for the first time, in an English 
dress, and for commending it to the attention of those young 
learners to whom the appeal of the classical teacher must be 
made anew from generation to generation. 

The Treatise on Style zs, tx truth, not only a document 
which students of Greek literature and rhetoric will find valu- 
able, but also a book of modern interest and significance. From 
the former point of view it 15 important to observe that, though 
itself probably composed at a date as late as, or even later than, 
the birth of Christ, rt preserves the best teaching of an earlier 
time,—the teaching of Aristotle's Rhetoric and Theophrastus 
lost work on Style. And in a multitude of details it throws 
light upon the subtle laws of Greek rhythm and the finer 
shades of Greek expression. It is, in short, a great aid to 
the study and appreciation of Greek literature on the more 
formal side. 

But I venture to hope that the treatise will also be acknow- 
ledged to have a distinct relation to the theory and practice of 


PREFACE ix 


modern English composition. Finding its standards in the 
best Greek writers, it advocates qualities such as purity of taste 
and propriety of expression which are none too common in any 
age or country. Most of 115 detailed observations apply to the 
modern no less than to the ancient languages ; and where there 
15 divergence, the very divergence ts instructive. It 15 in order 
to suggest its permanent interest that wlustrations from modern 
writers have been freely given in the course of the commentary. 
The Glossary also has been made full enough to indicate at once 
the richness of the De Elocutione as a repository of rhetorical 
terms and the comparative poverty of English in this respect. 
Possibly more work might with advantage be done both by 
English and by classical scholars in ascertaining first of all 
the actual resources, as regards rhetorical vocabulary, of the 
languages with which they are more tmmediately concerned. 
Some interesting English terms may, for instance, be gleaned 
Srom the lively and racy Elizabethan critics, one of whom— 
Puttenham—has been occasionally cited in this edition, while 
others will probably soon be accessible in Mr Gregory Smith's 
Elizabethan Critical Essays. And it must be admitted that 
an the field of ancient literary criticism itself a new Lexicon 
of Greek and Latin Rhetorical Terms zs a great desideratum, 
—together with other undertakings such as a Study of Greek 
Parody, and English editions of Quintilian’s Institutio Oratoria 
(on the model of Dr Peterson’s edition of Book X), of the Auctor 
ad Herennium, of Dionysius of Halicarnassus de Compositione 
Verborum azd de Oratoribus Antiquis, azd of the Rhetorica 
ad Alexandrum attributed to Anaximenes. As a general 
Index Graccitatis has not been appended to the present edition, 
zt may be well to take this opportunity of saying that I have 
prepared one for my own use and guidance, but have not printed 
it in view of the length of the Glossary and the number of 
references made to late or otherwise exceptional words in the 
course of the Notes. 

The Bibliography is shorter than in the companion editions 


x PREFACE 


of Longinus and Dionysius, but only because less work has been 
done, at home and abroad, in connexion with the De Elocutione. 
It 15, 1 think, practically complete; no effort has been spared to 
make it absolutely so. In reviewing The Three Literary 
Letters of Dionysius, 17. Max. Egger (whose own recent study 
Denys d’Halicarnasse appeared too late for me to profit by tt 
when writing the introduction to the present edition) courteously 
pointed out that the Bibliography of the Scripta Rhetorica 
Jaus to include a paper by 77. Mille, entitled Le jugement de 
Denys d’Halicarnasse sur Thucydide, which was published in 
the “ Annales de la Faculté des Lettres de Bordeaux” during the 
year 1889. 17] beg to thank 77. Egger for supplying the omission, 
and can only plead in extenuation the fact of fitful access to large 
libraries. I shall feel sincerely obliged to any other scholars who 
will do the same service as M. Egger to one who recognises to 
the full the duty imposed upon a modern editor, in a long- 
worked field like that of the classics, not only of advancing the 
study of his subject to the best of his power, but also (and as 
a necessary preliminary) of acquainting himself with what 
others have written in reference to tt. 

Among the scholars whose names are included in the present 
Libliography I feel conscious of special obligations to Vettori 
(Victorius), Spengel, Schenkl, Hammer, Durassier and Dati, 
as well as to more general treatises such as Nordews Antike 
Kunstprosa axa Navarre’s Essai sur la Rhetorique grecque 
avant Aristote. Radermacher’s eaition was only published at 
the end of last year when mine was virtually finished, and so 
L have been able to use it but little. My own standpoint, how- 
ever, is in many ways so different from that of Dr Radermacher 
that it seems unlikely that either edition would, in any event, 
have been much infiuenced by the other. It ts, nevertheless, a 
point of some interest that the need of a new edition should 
have been felt, simultaneously and independently, both im 
Germany and in England. 

I have again to thank my friends for much kind help 


PREFACE xi 


rendered in connexion with the production of this book. Mr 
A. 5. Way has enriched the volume with renderings of the verse 
passages quoted in the course of the treatise, and he has also 
suggested many improvements in the prose translation, and 
contributed the greater number of the English illustrations 
given in the Notes and Glossary. Mr G. B. Mathews and 
Mr W. A. D. Rouse have done wie the favour of reading and 
criticizing the proofs, while 7 am deeply sensible of the care 


and skill shown by the Readers of the Cambridge University 
Press. 


W. Ruys ROBERTS. 


THE BANK HOUSE, 
SOUTH NORWOOD. 
July 22, 1902. 


CONDE NES: 


PAGE 
INTRODUCTION 
A. The Study of Prose Style among the Greeks. : I 
Ie Early Rhetoricians and Sophists 
Il. <Adtic Orators . Ξ 2 : : ὃ : 6 
Ill. Plato and Aristotle . 4 : : : 3 12 
IV. Post-Aristotelian Philosophical and Philo- 
logical Schools - . é : : : τό 
V. Graeco-Roman Rhetorical Schools . : ὃ 20 
B. Contents of the De Elocutione. General Aspects of 
Greek Stylistic Study ¢ . 5 . 28 
C. Date and Authorship of the De Elocutione : : 49 
I. JLnternal Evidence . é : Ἢ - ὃ 49 
Il. External Evidence . : . : ὃ : 60 
TEXT AND TRANSLATION. é : ¢ : : 6 δ ός 
NOTESTES : : : 2 5 : : A ὃ 9 τ 200 
GLOSSARY i 6 : : ἃ : : ‘ . : e203 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. ὅ : : : : : : ὃ ὃ δ᾽ ey 
INDICES 
I. Names and Matters . : δ 5 . ο 5 BI 
Il. Passages quoted in the De Elocutione : : τ 327 
PLATES. 
Facsimile of P 1741, fol. 2267 . : : : : To follow 2. 64 


fol. 2457. . ὃ : 5 To face p. 208 


3 2) 


Be 


INTRODUCTION. 


A. THE STUDY OF PROSE STYLE AMONG THE GREEKS. 


ANY detailed history of the Greek theory of prose style 
manifestly lies outside the scope of an edition like the present. 
Nothing more can be attempted here than the selection of 
some representative names and the presentation of a few 
illustrative extracts. Some sketch of the kind, however brief 
it may be, seems a convenient introduction to the De El- 
cutione, which is itself a treatise on the subject of Prose Style. 


I. EARLY RHETORICIANS AND SOPHISTS. 


(1) BEmpedocles. Rhetoric, of which the theory of prose 
style is a branch, originated in the Greek towns of Sicily. 
According to a statement attributed to Aristotle, the inventor 
of rhetoric was Empedocles of Agrigentum (470 B.c.). If 
this be true, yet another achievement must be associated with 
the name of this poet, philosopher, and statesman. But Aris- 
totle, as elsewhere reported (Sext. Empir. vii. 6; Quintil. 111. 
I, 8), seems to imply no more than that Empedocles paved 
the way for a more systematic follower, perhaps for Gorgias, 
some of whose favourite figures of speech are illustrated by 
anticipation in surviving verses of Empedocles. 


(2) Corax and Tisias. The first writer to frame a τέχνη, 
or Art of Rhetoric, was Corax of Syracuse. Corax flourished 
about 460 B.C., and his aim, as a teacher of rhetoric, was to aid 


1 Diog. Laert. viii. 57, ᾿Αριστοτέλης δ᾽ ἐν τῷ Σοφιστῇ φησιν, πρῶτον ᾿μπεδοκλέα 
ῥητορικὴν εὑρεῖν, Ζήνωνα δὲ διαλεκτικήν. 
R. I 
a 


2 INTRODUCTION. 


litigants in asserting their rights of property during the re- 
settlement which followed the downfall of the tyrants and the 
establishment of democratic government in Sicily. It seems 
probable that Corax, in his manual, did not treat of the 
subject of style, but confined himself to the topic of probability 
(τὸ εἰκός) and to the consideration of the best method of 
arranging the contents ofa speech!. His pupil Tisias developed 
the topic of probability in a treatise of his own, and is said to 
have accompanied Gorgias to Athens in the year 427 B.C.” 


(3) Gorgias. It is with the arrival in Athens of Gorgias 
of Leontini, who is said to have been a pupil of Tisias, that 
the Sicilian movement begins to make itself felt in the wider 
field of Attic literature. Gorgias, whose long life covered 
nearly the whole of the fifth century B.C., was a man of com- 
manding power and may justly be regarded as the founder of 
artistic prose style*. His position at Athens, and his literary 
tendencies, may best be inferred from a passage of the 
Sicilian Diodorus, in connexion with one of Aristotle. Dio- 
dorus says: “When Gorgias came to Athens [the reference is 
to the Leontine embassy of 427 B.C.] and appeared before the 
popular assembly, he addressed the Athenians with regard to 
the alliance, and his distinguished style appealed irresistibly 
to their ready wits and love of speech. He was the first to 
employ the more unusual, and more artificial, figures of speech, 
such as antithesis, symmetry of clause, parallelism of structure, 
similarity of termination, and the-like. At that time such 
devices were warmly welcomed owing to the novelty of their 
craftmanship, whereas now they seem affected and ridiculous 
to ears sated by their repeated use*.” 


1 Spengel, A7t. Scvipft., pp. 23—26. 

2 Pausan. vi. 17, 8.—The chief passages in which ancient authors refer to the 
Sicilian Rhetoric are brought together in G. F. Hill’s Sources for Greek History 
between the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars, pp. 350, 354—350- 

° Gorgias’ life is variously assigned to the years 496—388 B.c. and the years 
483—375 B.c. Its long duration is not questioned. 

4 Diod. Sic. Bzbl. Hist. xii. 53, οὗτος οὖν καταντήσας els τὰς ᾿Αθήνας καὶ 
παραχθεὶς εἰς τὸν δῆμον, διελέχθη τοῖς ᾿Αθηναίοις περὶ τῆς συμμαχίας, Kal τῷ 
ξενίζοντι τῆς λέξεως ἐξέπληξε τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους, ὄντας εὐφυεῖς καὶ φιλολόγους. πρῶτος 
γὰρ ἐχρήσατο τοῖς τῆς λέξεως σχηματισμοῖς περιττοτέροις καὶ τῇ φιλοτεχνίᾳ διαφέρουσιν 


GREETS ACL VAS OF SVD ED: 3 


The passage of Aristotle occurs in the Rhetoric (111. 1, 9): 
“And as poets were thought to owe to their style the fame 
which they gained notwithstanding the ineptitude of their 
utterances, prose style in consequence took a poetical turn, as 
in the case of Gorgias. And even in our own day uneducated 
people commonly regard poetical prose as the finest. This 
however is not true; one form of language belongs to poetry, 


1.7 


another to ρτοϑε". 

While thus criticising him from the standpoint of their 
own day, Aristotle and Diodorus have done less than true 
historic justice to Gorgias. As Strabo (i. 2, 6) recognises, 
artistic prose begins by imitating poetry; and the task 
which Gorgias attempted was to keep in prose some of the 
colour, warmth and rhythmical movement, to which poetry 
(as represented by Homer or even by Empedocles) owed 
so much of its charm. To make the attempt at all was a 
great merit ; that it should be carried to excess was perhaps 
inevitable. It was a real service thus to have driven home 


ἀντιθέτοις καὶ ἰσοκώλοις καὶ παρίσοις Kal ὁμοιοτελεύτοις Kal τισιν ἑτέροις τοιούτοις, a 
τότε μὲν διὰ τὸ ξένον τῆς κατασκευῆς ἀποδοχῆς ἠξιοῦτο, νῦν δὲ περιεργίαν ἔχειν δοκεῖ 
καὶ φαίνεται καταγέλαστον πλεονάκις καὶ κατακόρως τιθέμενον. Timaeus seems here 
to be Diodorus’ authority: cp. Dionys. Halic. de Lysza, c. 3 (a passage which 
may be quoted at some length because of its importance from this and other 
points of view), τοῖς δὲ προτέροις οὐχ αὕτη ἡ O5Ea ἦν, ἀλλὰ βουλόμενοι κόσμον τινὰ 
προσεῖναι τοῖς λόγοις ἐξήλλαττον τὸν ἰδιώτην καὶ κατέφευγον εἰς τὴν ποιητικὴν φράσιν, 
μεταφοραῖς τε πολλαῖς χρώμενοι καὶ ὑπερβολαῖς καὶ ταῖς ἄλλαις τροπικαῖς ἰδέαις, 
ὀνομάτων τε γλωττηματικῶν καὶ ξένων χρήσει καὶ τῶν οὐκ εἰωθότων σχηματισμῶν τῇ 
διαλλαγῇ καὶ τῇ ἄλλῃ καινολογίᾳ καταπληττόμενοι τὸν ἰδιώτην. δηλοῖ δὲ τοῦτο 
Τοργίας τε ὁ Λεοντῖνος, ἐν πολλοῖς πάνυ φορτικήν τε καὶ ὑπέρογκον ποιῶν τὴν 
κατασκευὴν καὶ “οὐ πόρρω διθυράμβων τινῶν ἔνια φθεγγόμενος, καὶ τῶν ἐκείνου 
συνουσιαστῶν οἱ περὶ Λικύμνιόν τε καὶ Πῶλον. ἥψατο δὲ καὶ τῶν ᾿Αθήνησι ῥητόρων ἣ 
ποιητική τε καὶ τροπικὴ φράσις, ὡς μὲν Τίμαιός φησι, Γοργίου ἄρξαντος ἡνίκ᾽ ᾿Αθήναζε 
πρεσβεύων κατεπλήξατο τοὺς ἀκούοντας τῇ δημηγορίᾳ, ὡς δὲ τἀληθὲς ἔχει, τὸ καὶ 
παλαιότερον αἰεί τι θαυμαζομένη. Θουκυδίδης γοῦν ὁ δαιμονιώτατος τῶν συγγραφέων 
ἔν τε τῷ ἐπιταφίῳ καὶ ἐν ταῖς δημηγορίαις ποιητικῇ κατασκευῇ χρησάμενος ἐν πολλοῖς 
ἐξήλλαξε τὴν ἑρμηνείαν εἰς ὄγκον ἅμα καὶ κόσμον ὀνομάτων ἀηθέστερον. 

1 Aristot. Phet. iii. 1, 9, ἐπεὶ δ᾽ οἱ ποιηταὶ λέγοντες εὐήθη διὰ τὴν λέξιν ἐδόκουν 
πορίσασθαι τήνδε τὴν δόξαν, διὰ τοῦτο ποιητικὴ πρώτη ἐγένετο λέξις, οἷον ἡ Τοργίου, 
καὶ νῦν ἔτι οἱ πολλοὶ τῶν ἀπαιδεύτων τοὺς τοιούτους οἴονται διαλέγεσθαι κάλλιστα. 
τοῦτο δ᾽ οὐκ ἔστιν, ἀλλ᾽ ἑτέρα λόγου καὶ ποιήσεως λέξις ἐστίν. Cp. Dionys. Halic. 
de Imitat. ii. 8, Τοργίας μὲν τὴν ποιητικὴν ἑρμηνείαν μετήνεγκεν εἰς λόγους πολιτι- 
κούς, οὐκ ἀξιῶν ὅμοιον τὸν ῥήτορα τοῖς ἰδιώταις εἶναι. 


U4 


4 INTRODUCTION. 


the truth, which Greece never wholly forgot, that form and 
style are of the first importance in prose as well as in verse. 
Gorgias is so important a figure in the development of 
Greek prose style that it will be well to quote in full the 
most considerable of his surviving fragments’. This passage, 
which is a part—probably the peroration—of his Puneral 
Speech, affords clear traces of those peculiarities which are 
said to have marked Gorgias’ style in general. Its rhythmical 
character is obvious, and so are those figures which were sup- 
posed to be specially Gorgian. There is antithesis every- 
where. Parisosis is seen in such balanced clauses as 


σεμνοὶ μὲν πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς τῷ δικαίῳ, 
ὅσιοι δὲ πρὸς τοὺς τοκέας τῇ θεραπείᾳ, 
δίκαιοι μὲν πρὸς τοὺς ἀστοὺς τῷ ἴσῳ, 
εὐσεβεῖς δὲ πρὸς τοὺς φίλους τῇ πίστει. 


Homoeoteleuton appears in συμφέρον.. «πρέπον, ἀγάλματα... 
ἀναθήματα. There are instances, also, of compound words 
(διπλᾶ ὀνόματα), e.g. ἔμφυτος, ἐνόπλιος, εὐόργητος, φιλόκαλος : 
of far-fetched or poetical words (γλῶτται), e.g. νέμεσις, δισσός, 
τοκεύς: of metaphors, e.g. "Apns employed to denote ‘courage,’ 
and πόθος personified as Regret: and of the free use of 
adjectives, e.g. τὸ πρᾷον...τοῦ αὐθάδους, ἐμφύτου “Apeos... 


1 Gorgias, Epitaph. Fragm.: τί γὰρ ἀπῆν τοῖς ἀνδράσι τούτοις ὧν δεῖ ἀνδράσι 
προσεῖναι; τί δὲ καὶ προσῆν ὧν οὐ δεῖ προσεῖναι; εἰπεῖν δυναίμην ἃ βούλομαι, 
βουλοίμην δ᾽ ἃ δεῖ, λαθὼν μὲν τὴν θείαν νέμεσιν, φυγὼν δὲ τὸν ἀνθρώπινον φθόνον" 
οὗτοι γὰρ ἐκέκτηντο ἔνθεον μὲν τὴν ἀρετήν, ἀνθρώπινον δὲ τὸ θνητόν, πολλὰ μὲν δὴ τὸ 
πρᾷον ἐπιεικὲς τοῦ αὐθάδους δικαίου προκρίνοντες, πολλὰ δὲ νόμου ἀκριβείας λόγων 
ὀρθότητα, τοῦτον νομίζοντες θειότατον καὶ κοινότατον νόμον, τὸ δέον ἐν τῷ δέοντι καὶ 
λέγειν καὶ σιγᾶν καὶ ποιεῖν <kai ἐᾶν--, καὶ δισσὰ ἀσκήσαντες μάλιστα ὧν δεῖ, 
γνώμην καὶ ῥώμην, τὴν μὲν βουλεύοντες, τῆς δ᾽ ἀποτελοῦντες, θεράποντες τῶν μὲν 
ἀδίκως δυστυχούντων, κολασταὶ δὲ τῶν ἀδίκως εὐτυχούντων, αὐθάδεις πρὸς τὸ συμφέρον, 
εὐόργητοι πρὸς τὸ πρέπον, τῷ φρονίμῳ τῆς γνώμης παύοντες τὸ ἄφρον --τῆς puayns>, 
ὑβρισταὶ εἰς τοὺς ὑβριστάς, κόσμιοι εἰς τοὺς κοσμίους, ἄφοβοι εἰς τοὺς ἀφόβους, δεινοὶ 
ἐν τοῖς δεινοῖς. μαρτύρια δὲ τούτων τρόπαια ἐστήσαντο τῶν πολεμίων, Διὸς μὲν 
ἀγάλματα, αὑτῶν δὲ ἀναθήματα, οὐκ ἄπειροι οὔτε ἐμφύτου "Αρεος οὔτε νομίμων ἐρώτων 
οὔτε ἐνοπλίου ἔριδος οὔτε φιλοκάλου εἰρήνης, σεμνοὶ μὲν πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς τῷ δικαίῳ, 
ὅσιοι δὲ πρὸς τοὺς τοκέας τῇ θεραπείᾳ, δίκαιοι μὲν πρὸς τοὺς ἀστοὺς τῷ ἴσῳ, εὐσεβεῖς 
δὲ πρὸς τοὺς φίλους τῇ πίστει. τοιγαροῦν αὐτῶν ἀποθανόντων ὁ πόθος οὐ συναπέθανεν, 
ἀλλ᾽ ἀθάνατος οὐκ ἐν ἀθανάτοις σώμασι ζῇ οὐ ζώντων. 


GREEK STODY OF ST VLE. 5 


νομίμων ἐρώτων, KTrX.1 Such a style is elaborate to weariness ; 
but in estimating its possibilities, we must remember its in- 
fluence not only on fashionable poets like Agathon, but on 
great prose-writers beginning with Thucydides himself. It 
diffused the habit of scrupulous attention to form in prose- 
writing over a much wider circle of authors than that (large 
as it was) of the rhetorician’s own immediate pupils such as 
Polus, Proxenus, Licymnius, Alcidamas, Isocrates. 


(4) Sophists. From its eastern, no less than from its 
western, colonies Greece received aid and stimulus in the 
formation of an artistic prose style. If from the Sicilian 
Gorgias she learnt the lesson of εὐέπεια, or ‘beauty of 
language, she was instructed in the secrets of ὀρθοέπεια, or 
‘correctness of language, by sophists like Protagoras of 
Abdera, Prodicus of Ceos, and Thrasymachus of Chalcedon. 
Protagoras may be said to have founded the science of 
grammar; Prodicus busied himself with etymological ques- 
tions and with the distinction of synonyms; Hippias of Elis 
lectured on points of prosody as well as of grammar; 
Theodorus of Byzantium introduced new terms for the sub- 
divisions of a speech. The most important of all the sophists, 
from the standpoint of style, was Thrasymachus, who was 
born about 457 and flourished from 430 to 400 B.c. The 
work done by Thrasymachus was so important that his name 
may well be coupled with that of Gorgias as a founder of 
artistic prose. It was his great merit to have recognised the 


1 According to Aristotle (ez. iii. 3), Gorgias did not shrink from such com- 
pounds as πτωχόμουσος and κατευορκήσαντας, nor from such metaphors as χλωρὰ 
καὶ ἔναιμα τὰ πράγματα and σὺ δὲ ταῦτα αἰσχρῶς μὲν ἔσπειρας κακῶς δὲ ἐθέρισας. 
Cp. π. ty. ili. 2, ταύτῃ καὶ τὰ τοῦ Λεοντίνου Γοργίου γελᾶται γράφοντος “Ξέρξης ὁ 
τῶν Περσῶν Ζεύς," καὶ “Τύπες ἔμψυχοι τάφοι. See further Blass, Att. Bereds.? 
i. 63 ff., Navarre, Essai sur la Rhétorique grecque avant Aristote, pp. 86 ff. 

2 For Agathon reference may be made to an article on ‘Aristophanes and 
Agathon’ in the Journal of Hellenic Studies, xx. pp. 44—58, esp. p- 48: τὸ μὲν 
πάρεργον ἔργον ws ποιούμεθα, | τὸ δ᾽ ἔργον ws πάρεργον ἐκπονούμεθα. The fullest 
characterisation of the style of Thucydides will be found in Blass, A¢t. δεγεαάς." i. 
pp. 203—-244. Cp. also Norden, Axntike Kunstprosa, i. pp. 96—101, Jebb in 
Fiellenica, pp. 306 ff., Croiset, Thucydide, pp. 102 ff., and Histoire de la littérature 
grecgue, iv. pp. 155 ff. Dionys. Halic. de Lys. c. 3 (quoted on p. 3 supra) and de 
Thucyd. c. 52 should at the same time be consulted. 


6 INTRODUCTION. 


period as an essential of good rhythmical prose. Of his style 
the following is a specimen : 


ἐβουλόμην ὦ ᾿Αθηναῖοι μετασχεῖν ἐκείνου τοῦ χρόνου τοῦ παλαιοῦ 
καὶ τῶν πραγμάτων ἡνίκα σιωπᾶν ἀπέχρη τοῖς νεωτέροις ] τῶν τε 
πραγμάτων οὐκ ἀναγκαζόντων ἀγορεύειν | καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων ὀρθῶς 
τὴν πόλιν ἐπιτροπευόντων || ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ εἰς τοιοῦτον ἡμᾶς ἀνέθετο χρόνον 
ὃ δαίμων | ὥστε (τὰς μὲν εὐπραξίας) τῆς πόλεως ἀκούειν, | Tas δὲ 
συμφορὰς (ὁρᾶν) αὐτοὺς | καὶ τούτων τὰ μέγιστα μὴ θεῶν ἔργα εἶναι 
μηδὲ τῆς τύχης ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐπιμεληθέντων | ἀνάγκη δὴ λέγειν | ἢ γὰρ 
ἀναίσθητος ἢ καρτερωτατός ἐστιν ὅστις ἐξαμαρτάνειν ἑαυτὸν ἔτι παρέξει 
τοῖς βουλομένοις | καὶ τῆς ἑτέρων ἐπιβουλῆς τε καὶ κακίας | αὐτὸς ὑπο- 
σχήσει τὰς αἰτίας. 

It was the belief of Theophrastus, as Dionysius tells us, 
that Thrasymachus was the originator of that periodic struc- 
ture which “presents the thought in a compact and rounded 
form’.” Dionysius also states that Thrasymachus devised a 
middle style, standing midway between the extremes of 
elaboration and plainness, and anticipating (in some sense) 
the styles of Isocrates and Plato’. 


II. ATTIC ORATORS. 


(1) Antiphon. Antiphon, who heads the list of the Ten 
Attic Orators, was born about 480 B.C., and was put to death 
in the year 411, after delivering the masterly defence so 
highly extolled by Thucydides*. His dignified and austere 


1 Divided here as by Blass, “4122. Bereds.2 i. 254. The fragment, interesting as 
it is, does not altogether accord with the statements of Aristot. he/. ii. 8 and 
Cic. Or. 39 ff., 174 ff. But the fragment itself, and the remark with which it is 
introduced, should be examined in Dionys. Hal. de adm. vi dic. in Demosth. c. 3 
(Usener-Radermacher’s text); and reference should be made to Norden, Avzst- 
Prosa, 1. pp. 42, 43- 

2 Dionys. Hal. de Lys. c. 3: ἡ συστρέφουσα τὰ νοήματα καὶ στρογγύλως 
ἐκφέρουσα λέξις. 

3 Dionys. Hal. de adm. vi dic. 71 Demniosth. c. 3. 

4 Thucyd. viii. 68: ἦν δὲ ὁ μὲν τὴν γνώμην ταύτην εἰπὼν Πείσανδρος, καὶ τἄλλα 
ἐκ τοῦ προφανοῦς προθυμότατα ξυγκαταλύσας τὸν δῆμον’ ὁ μέντοι ἅπαν τὸ πρᾶγμα 
ξυνθεὶς ὅτῳ τρόπῳ κατέστη ἐς τοῦτο καὶ ἐκ πλείστου ἐπιμεληθεὶς ᾿Αντιῴφῶὸν ἦν, ἀνὴρ 
᾿Αθηναίων τῶν καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἀρετῇ τε ovdevds ὕστερος καὶ κράτιστος ἐνθυμηθῆναι 
γενόμενος καὶ ἃ γνοίη εἰπεῖν, καὶ ἐς μὲν δῆμον οὐ παριὼν οὐδ᾽ ἐς ἄλλον ἀγῶνα ἑκούσιος 
οὐδένα, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπόπτως τῷ πλήθει διὰ δόξαν δεινότητος διακείμενος, τοὺς μέντοι 


CREEKES GOD VAOLSS LAGE. 7 


style, in which Thucydides and he closely resemble each 
other, may be illustrated by the following short example: 
ἐβουλόμην μὲν ὦ ἄνδρες THY δύναμιν τοῦ λέγειν Kal THY ἐμ- 
πειρίαν τῶν πραγμάτων | ἐξ ἴσου μοι καθεστάναι τῇ τε συμφορᾷ 
καὶ τοῖς κακοῖς τοῖς γεγενημένοις νῦν δὲ τοῦ μὲν πεπείραμαι 
πέρα τοῦ προσήκοντος | ToD δ᾽ ἐνδεής εἰμι μᾶλλον τοῦ συμ- 
φέροντος || οὗ μὲν γάρ με ἔδει κακοπαθεῖν τῷ σώματι μετὰ 
τῆς αἰτίας τῆς οὐ προσηκούσης | ἐνταυθοῖ οὐδέν με ὠφέλησεν 
ἡ ἐμπειρία | οὗ δέ με δεῖ σωθῆναι μετὰ τῆς ἀληθείας εἰπόντα 
τὰ γενόμενα | ἐν τούτῳ με βλάπτει ἡ τοῦ λέγειν ἀδυναμία". 
Antiphon is the first extant Greek writer who unites the 
theory with the practice of rhetoric. A special interest in 
the history of Greek style attaches to his Tetralogies, because 
they are so closely influenced by the sophistic movement. 


(2) lysias. Lysias, the son of the Syracusan Cephalus, 
was born at Athens, where he settled in 412 B.C. after spend- 
ing some of his early years in Thurii. At Athens he won a 
great reputation as a writer of speeches to be delivered by 
clients in the law-courts. He was regarded, by later critics, 
as the most distinguished representative of that plain style of 


ἀγωνιζομένους καὶ ἐν δικαστηρίῳ καὶ ἐν δήμῳ πλεῖστα els ἀνήρ, ὅστις ξυμβουλεύσαιτό 
τι, δυνάμενος ὠφελεῖν. καὶ αὐτός τε, ἐπειδὴ [μετέστη ἡ δημοκρατία καὶ ἐς ἀγῶνας 
κατέστη] τὰ τῶν τετρακοσίων ἐν ὑστέρῳ μεταπεσόντα ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου ἐκακοῦτο, ἄριστα 
φαίνεται τῶν μέχρι ἐμοῦ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν τούτων, αἰτιαθεὶς ὡς ξυγκατέστησε, θανάτου 
δίκην ἀπολογησάμενος. This passage has been transcribed because (though not 
part of a Thucydidean Speech) it may suggest to the student a comparison 
between the styles of Antiphon and Thucydides: cp. the references given on p. 5, 
n. 2supra. The design of the present introduction is rather to bring into relief 
the less familiar names, e.g. that of Gorgias. The direct influence of Gorgias, and 
of the early rhetoricians and sophists generally, may possibly have been exaggerated 
by the Graeco-Roman critics whose thoughts were turned almost entirely to 
oratorical prose. Yet all the best Greek prose was intended to please the ear, and 
Gorgias in particular popularised a fine instrument of expression. Let the 
antithetic phrase once be loaded with thought as in Thucydides, and we see how 
valuable an instrument the λέξις ἀντικειμένη may be made. ‘In general there 
can be little doubt that the excesses of the early rhetoricians, like those of the 
euphuistic writers of the time of Elizabeth, tended both to refine and invigorate 
the language of prose, and to render it a more adequate vehicle of thought than it 
had hitherto been” (Thompson, Gozgzas of Plato, p. 177). 

1 Antiphon, de Caed. Herod., init. The style of Antiphon is fully treated in 
Jebb, Az. Or. i. 18 ff. and in Blass, 4:2. Bereds.? i. pp. 120 ff. 


8 INTRODUCTION. 


oratory which copied the language of ordinary life. But the 
simplicity of Lysias is a studied simplicity; it is the result 
of an art that can conceal itself. Dionysius points this out 
clearly. He remarks that Lysias, in contrast to his pre- 
decessors, can invest a subject with dignity although he uses 
only the most commonplace words and refrains from all 
poetical embellishment. “But,” he adds, “though he may 
seem to express himself like ordinary people, he is vastly 
superior to any ordinary writer’.” The following excellent 
example of the simplicity and directness of Lysias is given 
elsewhere by Dionysius : 


> α΄ Oo © > ψ 5, ΄ \ a , A 
ἀναγκαῖόν μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι, ὦ avopes δικασταί, περὶ τῆς φιλίας τῆς 
ΡΟΣ A 2 A A 
ἐμῆς καὶ τῆς Φερενίκου πρῶτον εἰπεῖν πρὸς ὑμᾶς, ἵνα μηδεὶς ὑμῶν 
, 7 ε “ , « 
θαυμάσῃ, ὅτι ὑπὲρ οὐδενὸς ὑμῶν πώποτε εἰρηκὼς πρότερον ὑπὲρ τούτου 
Ν / > Ν ΄ > m4 ,ὔ , > / c 4 
νυνὶ λέγω. ἐμοὶ yap, ὦ avdpes δικασταί, ξένος ἣν Κηφισόδοτος ὃ τούτου 
,ὔ Ν A > 4 > , 5 > / , Ν > Ν 
πατήρ, καὶ ὅτε ἐφεύγομεν, ἐν Θήβαις παρ᾽ ἐκείνῳ κατηγόμην καὶ ἐγὼ 
ΜΝ > Ν > Ν ΄ὔ 
καὶ ἄλλος ᾿Αθηναίων ὃ βουλόμενος, καὶ πολλὰ καὶ ἀγαθὰ καὶ ἰδίᾳ καὶ 
΄ ΄ Qo) > a Ε Ν ε / Ὁ L 2 Ἂν 
δημοσίᾳ παθόντες ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν ἡμετέραν αὐτῶν κατήλθομεν. ἐπεὶ 
3 > - a 3 κ , > ΄ κ᾿ rN > , 
δ᾽ οὖν οὗτοι ταῖς αὐταῖς τύχαις ἐχρήσαντο καὶ φυγάδες ᾿Αθήναζε 
5 ΄ὔ ε , Ν / > ~ > ΄ » δ > 4 
ἀφίκοντο, ἡγούμενος τὴν μεγίστην αὐτοῖς ὀφείλειν χάριν οὕτως οἰκείως 
ε / 7 a A / /, ΄ 
αὐτοὺς ὑπεδεξάμην, ὥστε μηδένα γνῶναι τῶν εἰσιόντων, εἰ μή τις πρό- 
> 4 ε ΄’΄ ε “ ‘ / Ss φᾺ ἊΝ 
τερον ἠπίστατο, ὁπότερος ἡμῶν ἐκέκτητο τὴν οἰκίαν. οἷδε μὲν οὖν καὶ 
Ss + ’ 7 Ν Lol , 
Φερένικος, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ὅτι πολλοὶ λέγειν εἰσὶν ἐμοῦ δεινότεροι 
ν᾿ n ΄ ΄ " > > ¢ ε κ N aN 
καὶ μᾶλλον τοιούτων πραγμάτων ἔμπειροι, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως ἡγεῖται τὴν ἐμὴν 
΄ > tat 
οἰκειότητα πιστοτάτην εἶναι. αἰσχρὸν οὖν μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι κελεύοντος 
΄ x ΄ Ν ΄ 2 A 67 ὃ a SEL θ᾽ ω 
τούτου καὶ δεομένου τὰ δίκαια αὐτῷ βοηθῆσαι περιιδεῖν αὐτόν, καθ᾽ ὅσον 


Ὁ A a 2 
οἷός T εἰμὶ ἐγώ, τῶν ὑπ᾽ ᾿Ανδροκλείδου δεδομένων στερηθῆναι. 


(3) Isocrates. [ϑοογαΐεϑ was born in 436 Β.6., and died 
in the year of the battle of Chaeroneia (338 B.c.). He was 
regarded in antiquity as a disciple of Gorgias who followed 
his master in his elaborate attention to form, while avoiding 
his use of poetical diction. As a political pamphleteer he 


1 Dionys. Hal. de Lys. c. 3: καὶ οὐκ ἐπὶ τούτῳ μόνον ἐπαινεῖν αὐτὸν ἄξιον, ἀλλ᾽ 
ὅτι καὶ σεμνὰ καὶ περιττὰ καὶ μεγάλα φαίνεσθαι τὰ πράγματα ποιεῖ τοῖς κοινοτάτοις 
χρώμενος ὀνόμασι καὶ ποιητικῆς οὐχ ἁπτόμενος κατασκευῆς....... ὁμοίως δὲ τοῖς ἰδιώταις 
διαλέγεσθαι δοκῶν πλεῖστον ὅσον ἰδιώτου διαφέρει. 

2 Lysiae fragm. cxx.: Dionys. Hal. de Jsaeo, cc. 6, 7.—The cardinal Attic 
virtue of σαφήνεια is as well exemplified in this extract as in any that could be 
adduced. 


CRETE SHOUD NAORI SL VLE: 9 


was unsurpassed in his own day. Through his influence on 
the later rhetorical schools, and especially on Cicero, he has 
done much to shape the literary prose of modern Europe, 
a manner less rigidly Attic than that of Lysias contributing 
greatly to his wide popularity. Some of his characteristics 
are thus described by Dionysius: “Isocrates’ great aim is 
beauty of diction, and he cultivates the elegant rather than 
the plain style. Hiatus he shuns because it destroys harmony 
of sound and spoils smoothness of utterance. He endeavours 
to include his thoughts in a period, or circle, which is quite 
rhythmical and not far removed from the metre of poetry. 
His works are better suited for private reading than for 
forensic use. Accordingly his discourses can be declaimed in 
public assemblies or thumbed by the student, but will not 
stand the test of the legislative assembly or the law-courts, 
where much is needed of that passion which attention to 
the period is apt to quench. Further, similarity of sounds, 
symmetry of members, antitheses, and the entire apparatus 
of similar figures, abound in his writings and often mar the 
general effect of the composition by importuning the ear’.” 

The following extract may serve as a brief example of 
the style of Isocrates: 


τ Ν ἊΝ es φ . ; A x 
οὕτω δὲ πολιτικῶς εἶχον, ὥστε καὶ τὰς στάσεις ἐποιοῦντο πρὸς 
, Ν , ms a gy 
ἀλλήλους, οὐχ ὅπότεροι τοὺς ἑτέρους ἀπολέσαντες TOV λοιπῶν ἄρξουσιν, 
> > Ν , 5» ΄, ΄ Ν Ν 
ἀλλ᾽ ὁπότεροι φθήσονται τὴν πόλιν ἀγαθόν τι ποιήσαντες: καὶ τὰς 
ε ΄ a > GN a 207 ΄ aWNG EN - A 
ἑταιρείας συνῆγον οὐχ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίᾳ συμφερόντων, a ἐπὶ τῇ τοῦ 
΄ ἊΝ ἊΝ na ” , 
πλήθους ὠφελείᾳ. τὸν αὐτὸν δὲ τρόπον καὶ τὰ τῶν ἄλλων διῴκουν, 


5 y Suey, 
θεραπεύοντες ἀλλ᾽ ody ὑβρίζοντες τοὺς Ἕλληνας, καὶ στρατηγεῖν οἰόμενοι 


1 Dionys. Hal. de 7οε7: c. 2, ὁ γὰρ ἀνὴρ οὗτος τὴν εὐέπειαν ἐκ παντὸς διώκει καὶ 
τοῦ γλαφυρῶς λέγειν στοχάζεται μᾶλλον ἢ τοῦ ἀφελῶς. τῶν τε γὰρ φωνηέντων τὰς 
παραλλήλους θέσεις ὡς ἐκλυούσας τὰς ἁρμονίας τῶν ἤχων καὶ τὴν λειότητα τῶν 
φθόγγων λυμαινομένας περιίσταται, περιόδῳ τε καὶ κύκλῳ περιλαμβάνειν τὰ νοήματα 
πειρᾶται ῥυθμοειδεῖ πάνυ καὶ οὐ πολὺ ἀπέχοντι τοῦ ποιητικοῦ μέτρου, ἀναγνὠώσεώς TE 
μᾶλλον οἰκειότερός ἐστιν ἢ χρήσεως. τοιγάρτοι τὰς μὲν ἐπιδείξεις τὰς ἐν ταῖς 
πανηγύρεσι καὶ τὴν ἐκ χειρὸς θεωρίαν φέρουσιν αὐτοῦ οἱ λόγοι, τοὺς δὲ ἐν ἐκκλησίαις 
καὶ δικαστηρίοις ἀγῶνας οὐχ ὑπομένουσι. τούτου δὲ αἴτιον, ὅτι πολὺ τὸ παθητικὸν 
ἐν ἐκείνοις εἶναι δεῖ τοῦτο δὲ ἥκιστα δέχεται περίοδος. αἵ τε παρομοιώσεις καὶ 
παρισώσεις καὶ τὰ ἀντίθετα καὶ πᾶς ὁ τῶν τοιούτων σχημάτων κόσμος πολύς ἐστι παρ᾽ 
αὐτῷ καὶ λυπεῖ πολλάκις τὴν ἄλλην κατασκευὴν προσιστάμενος ταῖς ἀκοαῖς. Cp. C.13 
ibid., ὁ τῶν περιόδων ῥυθμός, ἐκ παντὸς διώκων τὸ γλαφυρόν. 


10 INTRODUCTION. 


~ > Ν Ν a “ A aA ε 
δεῖν ἀλλὰ μὴ τυραννεῖν αὐτῶν, καὶ μᾶλλον ἐπιθυμοῦντες ἡγεμόνες ἢ 
ὃ id , Ν a > Ν Ν “ > a 
εσπόται προσαγορεύεσθαι καὶ σωτῆρες ἀλλὰ μὴ λυμεῶνες ἀποκαλεῖσθαι, 
τῷ nen ea > t : \ aN AN > Bi ΄ ᾿ 
ᾧ ποιεῖν εὖ προσαγόμενοι τὰς πόλεις, a οὐ βίᾳ καταστρεφόμενοι, 
Sh Need ἘΠΕ ; a 
πιστοτέροις μὲν τοῖς λόγοις ἢ νῦν τοῖς ὅρκοις χρώμενοι, ταῖς δὲ συνθήκαις 
y we, A ; τ ; 
ὥσπερ ἀνάγκαις ἐμμένειν ἀξιοῦντες, οὐχ οὕτως ἐπὶ ταῖς δυναστείαις μέγα 
A δ ΧΑ ΔΝ ΛΩΝ i ΣᾺ , ἀν OS τ οι 
φρονοῦντες ὡς ἐπὶ τῷ σωφρόνως ζῆν φιλοτιμούμενοι, τὴν αὐτὴν ἀξιοῦντες 
΄ὔ » Ν ΄ Ψ Ν a 
γνώμην ἔχειν πρὸς τοὺς ἥττους ἥνπερ τοὺς κρείττους πρὸς σφᾶς αὐτούς, 
Ε ” A ε ‘ > \ 
ἴδια μὲν ἄστη τὰς αὑτῶν πόλεις ἡγούμενοι, κοινὴν δὲ πατρίδα THY “EAAada 


΄ 3 1 
νομίζοντες εἶναι". 


Isocrates was the most indefatigable and successful of 
teachers. Among his pupils, who were numerous and eminent, 
may be mentioned statesmen and orators such as Timotheus, 
Lycurgus, Hyperides and Isaeus, and writers such as the 
historians Theopompus and Ephorus*. The μελέται, or exer- 
cises, which he set to his pupils and for which his own 
writings served as models, were a principal part of his system 
of teaching. He is also said to have composed an Art of 
Rhetoric, of which one of the most characteristic precepts 
would appear to have been that “prose must not be merely 
prose, or it will be dry; nor metrical, or its art will be un- 
disguised; but it should be compounded with every sort of 
rhythm, particularly iambic or trochaic’.” The task Isocrates 
set before him was, as he himself says, to use the words of 
ordinary life as opposed to the far-sought vocabulary of the 
poets, and at the same time to employ musical and rhythmical 
language, which should be as various as the thoughts expressed’. 


1 Tsocr. Panegyr. §§ 79—81 (ed. J. Ε΄. Sandys). 

2 To Ephorus is attributed (cp. Ahet. Gr. ii. 71, ed. Spengel) a treatise περὶ 
λέξεως: so that he transmitted his master’s doctrine theoretically as well as 
practically. 

3 Tsocr. Zech. fr. 6 (Benseler-Blass), ὅλως δὲ ὁ λόγος" μὴ λόγος ἔστω, ξηρὸν yap" 
μηδὲ ἔμμετρος, καταφανὲς γάρ. ἀλλὰ μεμίχθω παντὶ ῥυθμῷ, μάλιστα ἰαμβικῷ ἢ 
τροχαϊκῷ. 

4 Isocr. Hvag. 9, τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ποιηταῖς πολλοὶ δέδονται κόσμοι᾽ καὶ γὰρ 
πλησιάζοντας τοὺς θεοὺς τοῖς ἀνθρώποις οἷόν τ᾽ αὐτοῖς ποιῆσαι, καὶ διαλεγομένους καὶ 
συναγωνιζομένους οἷς ἂν βουληθῶσι, καὶ περὶ τούτων δηλῶσαι μὴ μόνον τοῖς τεταγμένοις 
ὀνόμασιν, ἀλλὰ τὰ μὲν ξένοις, τὰ δὲ καινοῖς, τὰ δὲ μεταφοραῖς, καὶ μηδὲν παραλιπεῖν, 
ἀλλὰ πᾶσι τοῖς εἴδεσι διαποικῖλαι τὴν ποίησιν. τοῖς δὲ περὶ τοὺς λόγους οὐδὲν ἔξεστι 
τῶν τοιούτων, ἀλλ᾽ ἀποτόμως καὶ τῶν ὀνομάτων τοῖς πολιτικοῖς μόνον καὶ τῶν 


ἐνθυμημάτων τοῖς περὶ αὐτὰς τὰς πράξεις ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστι χρῆσθαι. Contra Sophistas 


CREEKS TEOD | OLS ΘῈΣ ΤΙ 


Much of the teaching of Isocrates and his predecessors is 
supposed to be embodied in the treatise on rhetoric (πολιτικοὶ 
λόγοι, not ῥητορική, is the term used by the author himself) 
known as the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, commonly (though 
the evidence is not absolutely conclusive) attributed to the 
rhetor Anaximenes, who was a contemporary of Alexander 
the Great and accompanied him on his campaigns. The work 
is purely utilitarian in aim, and is composed in that sophistic 
spirit which moved the indignation of Plato and Aristotle. 
As a practical manual for the use of the advocate it stands 
high, while in its lack of philosophic breadth and scientific 
method it is as far as possible removed from the Rhetoric of 
Aristotle. The bulk of the treatise is, naturally, occupied 
with a consideration of the proofs, presumptions, and fallacies 
by the aid of which a cause may be won. But it is 
rather strange that so practical a work does not seem to 
recognise a separate department of style. The contents of 
the chapters (cc. 24—-28) devoted to ἑρμηνεία, or the art of 
expression, are at once miscellaneous and meagre. They deal 
cursorily with such topics as two-membered periods, per- 
spicuity, the article and connective particles, hiatus and 
ambiguous words, and the figures ἀντίθεσις, παρίσωσις, 
παρομοίωσις (viz. parallelism in sense, structure, sound). 


(4) Demosthenes. The Ten Attic Orators were Anti- 
phon, Andocides, Lysias, Isocrates, Isaeus, Demosthenes, 
Aeschines, Lycurgus, Hyperides, Deinarchus. For the pur- 
poses of this outline sketch, Demosthenes (384-322 B.C.) is 
the only remaining name which need occupy us, and that 
but for a moment’. 


16, φημὶ yap ἐγὼ τῶν μὲν ἰδεῶν, ἐξ ὧν τοὺς λόγους ἅπαντας καὶ λέγομεν καὶ συντί- 
θεμεν, λαβεῖν τὴν ἐπιστήμην οὐκ εἶναι τῶν πάνυ χαλεπῶν, ἤν τις αὑτὸν παραδῷ μὴ 
τοῖς ῥᾳδίως ὑπισχνουμένοις, ἀλλὰ τοῖς εἰδόσι τι περὶ αὐτῶν: τὸ δὲ τούτων ἐφ᾽ ἑκάστῳ 
τῶν πραγμάτων ἃς δεῖ προελέσθαι καὶ μῖξαι πρὸς ἀλλήλας καὶ τάξαι κατὰ τρόπον, ἔτι 
δὲ τῶν καιρῶν μὴ διαμαρτεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς ἐνθυμήμασι πρεπόντως ὅλον τὸν λόγον 
καταποικῖλαι καὶ τοῖς ὀνόμασιν εὐρύθμως καὶ μουσικῶς εἰπεῖν, ταῦτα δὲ πολλῆς 
ἐπιμελείας δεῖσθαι καὶ ψυχῆς ἀνδρικῆς καὶ δοξαστικῆς ἔργον εἶναι, κτλ. 

1 Of the four orators here chosen Antiphon is typical of the grand style, Lysias 
of the plain, Isocrates of the middle, while Demosthenes is the ‘ Proteus’ of style. 
All four are students, though not all are teachers, of prose style. ~ Changes 


12 INTRODUCTION. 


Demosthenes was no teacher of rhetoric, nor did he leave 
behind him any manual of the art. But his immediate 
triumphs were great ; and after his death the written remains 
of his oratory gradually won him a place as a recognised 
master, and supreme model, of eloquence. When the practice 
of imitation (μίμησις) became a regular feature of the training 
given in the rhetorical schools, his influence was widely 
extended. By some of the best critics—by Cicero no less 
than by Dionysius—he was regarded as combining, with 
peculiar success, the excellences of all previous styles and 
orators. His sensitive observance of the most delicate shades 
of rhythm and harmony will be touched upon presently. No 
better illustration of his nervous and emphatic style could be 
given than one quoted by Dionysius (de adm. vi dic. m 
Demosth. c. 21) from the Third Olynthiac : 


> "5 Ὑ > A “ \ ΄ 2 A 
καίτοι σκέψασθ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, a τις av kepada εἰπεῖν ἔχοι 
Aa iN A ΄ ” N A Sno 0 oo " N \ \ 
τῶν T ἐπὶ τῶν προγόνων ἔργων Kal τῶν ἐφ᾽ ὑμῶν. ἔσται δὲ βραχὺς καὶ 
΄, CA! ἢ , > Ν > ΄ Ὁ νὰ ΄ ΄ 
γνώριμος ὑμῖν ὃ λόγος: οὐ γὰρ ἀλλοτρίοις ὑμῖν χρωμένοις παραδείγμασιν, 
ἀλλ᾽ οἰκείοις, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, εὐδαίμοσιν ἔξεστι γενέσθαι. ἐκεῖνοι 
, Se > > / > ε / 29? > / > Ἂ 7 ε a 
τοίνυν, ois οὐκ ἐχαρίζονθ᾽ οἱ λέγοντες οὐδ᾽ ἐφίλουν αὐτοὺς ὥσπερ ὑμᾶς 
Ἐν a ΄ Ν Ν ΄ > ὟΝ, “ ε ΄ > ens, 
οὗτοι νῦν, πέντε μὲν καὶ τετταράκοντ ἔτη τῶν λλήνων ἦρξαν ἑκόντων, 
΄, > oN ΄ ΄ 3 > N 3 ΄ 3. ee, € ΄ 5 © 
πλείω δ᾽ ἢ μύρια τάλαντ᾽ εἰς τὴν ἀκρόπολιν ἀνήγαγον, ὑπήκουεν δ᾽ ὁ 
΄ \ ΄ " > a ΄ “ > \ a ΄ 
ταύτην τὴν χώραν ἔχων αὐτοῖς βασιλεύς, ὥσπερ ἐστὶ προσῆκον βάρβαρον 
“ rn μὲ / > 
Ἕλλησι, πολλὰ δὲ καὶ καλὰ καὶ πεζῇ Kal ναυμαχοῦντες ἔστησαν τρόπαι 
, : , ; . Rah 
αὐτοὶ στρατευόμενοι, μόνοι 6 ἀνθρώπων κρείττω τὴν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἔργοις 


δόξαν τῶν φθονούντων κατέλιπον, κτλ. (Demosth. Olynth. iil. 23 ff.). 


III. PLATO AND ARISTOTLE. 


(1) Plato. In Plato (428-347 B.C.) and Aristotle (384— 
322 B.C.) we find rhetoric raised to an altogether higher plane 
than it had hitherto occupied. Its treatment is conceived 
philosophically. In the Gorgias Plato, alienated by the 
extravagances and unscrupulous methods of the sophists and 


1 Conceived with a φιλοσοφία very different from that of Isocrates, who can 
hardly be thought to have fulfilled altogether the hopes expressed in the words: 
φύσει γάρ, ὦ φίλε, ἔνεστί τις φιλοσοφία τῇ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς διανοίᾳ (Plat. Phaedr. 279 A). 


GREEK STUDY OF STYLE. 13 


rhetoricians of his own and earlier times, affirms that Rhetoric 
is no art but a mere knack (τριβή, ἐμπειρία). In the Phaedrus 
he takes a wider view, and traces the outlines of a philosophical 
rhetoric, based alike on dialectic and on psychology. 

It has sometimes been thought, perhaps with insufficient 
reason, that when Plato composed the Phaedrus he intended 
to write subsequently a systematic treatise on rhetoric, in- 
cluding the art of expression. Be this so or not, he has in 
the course of the Phaedrus made a most important con- 
tribution to the theory of composition in suggesting that 
“every discourse ought to be constructed like a picture of 
a living organism, having its own body and head and feet ; 
it must have middle and extremities, drawn in a manner 
agreeable to one another and to the whole.” 

Much of Plato’s best criticism on style is conveyed by the 
indirect method of parody. Lysias is thus treated in the 
Phaedris 230 E (where, however, the passage recited by 
Phaedrus may be a genuine production of Lysias); Prodicus 
in the Protagoras 337 A—C; and Agathon in the Banquet 
195—1977. The subject of Plato’s own wonderful style in its 
various phases is too large for cursory treatment. But it is 
to be noted that the ancient critics discerned its strong poetic 


1 Plat. Phaedr. 264, ἀλλὰ τόδε γε οἶμαί σε φάναι ἄν, δεῖν πάντα λόγον ὥσπερ 
ζῷον συνεστάναι σῶμά τι ἔχοντα αὐτὸν αὑτοῦ, ὥστε μήτε ἀκέφαλον εἶναι μήτε ἄπουν, 
ἀλλὰ μέσα τε ἔχειν καὶ ἄκρα, πρέποντ᾽ ἀλλήλοις καὶ τῷ ὅλῳ γεγραμμένα. The 
passage is translated in 5. H. Butcher’s Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art?, 
p- 188, where it is pointed out that Aristotle took this idea (which in Plato applies 
to prose no less than to verse) as the basis of his theory of dramatic art.—Cp. 264 B 
thid., σὺ δ᾽ ἔχεις τινὰ ἀνάγκην λογογραφικήν, ἣ ταῦτα ἐκεῖνος οὕτως ἐφεξῆς map’ 
ἄλληλα ἔθηκεν.---ΒῸΥ sincerity in art, cp. 26ο E zb7d., τοῦ δὲ λέγειν, φησὶν ὁ Λάκων, 
ἔτυμος τέχνη ἄνευ τοῦ ἀληθείας ἧφθαι οὔτ᾽ ἔστιν οὔτε μή ποθ᾽ ὕστερον γένηται. 

2 A systematic collection of the parodies and literary references found in Plato 
and in Aristophanes would be a useful contribution to the study of Greek literary 
criticism. The slightest hints dropped by literary artists so transcendent as Aris- 
tophanes and Plato are of the utmost value. How much light, for instance, is 
thrown on the poetic art by Plato’s references to inspiration in the /oz and the 
Phaedrus (245 A), or even by his own half-profane conversion of the opening of 
the Ziad into prose narrative (Ref. iil. 393 Ὁ, E, 394A). The prose-poet has 
here accomplished his self-imposed task with consummate skill, but in so doing 
has (as he was fully aware) demonstrated that to destroy the artistic form of a 
work of art is to destroy the work of art itself. 


14 INTRODUCTION. 


vein, and some even thought that they detected in it the in- 
fluence of Gorgias!. The author of the De Sublimitate (xiii. 1) 
adduces the following passage as an example of the manner 
(τύπος) of Plato: of dpa φρονήσεως Kai ἀρετῆς ἄπειροι εὐω- 
χίαις δὲ Kal τοῖς τοιούτοις ἀεὶ συνόντες κάτω ὡς ἔοικε φέρονται 
\ / lal Ν / \ \ \ 2 \ ” eS) 
Kal ταύτῃ πλανῶνται διὰ βίου, πρὸς δὲ TO ἀληθὲς ἄνω οὔτ 
ἀνέβλεψαν πώποτε οὔτ᾽ ἀνηνέχθησαν οὐδὲ βεβαίου τε καὶ 
an ε n ᾽ / " \ , ΄, ͵ >\ 
καθαρᾶς ἡδονῆς ἐγεύσαντο, ἀλλὰ βοσκημάτων δίκην κάτω ἀεὶ 
βλέποντες καὶ κεκυφότες εἰς γῆν καὶ εἰς τραπέζας βόσκονται 
χορταζόμενοι καὶ ὀχεύοντες, καὶ ἕνεκα τῆς τούτων πλεονεξίας 
λακτίζοντες καὶ κυρίττοντες ἀλλήλους σιδηροῖς κέρασι καὶ 
ὁπλαῖς ἀποκτιννύουσι Ot ἀπληστίαν (Pl. Rep. ix. 586 A). 


(2) Aristotle. It is perhaps to the hints thrown out in 
the Phaedrus that Aristotle owed the first conception of his 
great work on LRfeforic, in which he constructs an art of 
rhetoric on the basis of dialectic and psychology. The first 
two books of his treatise deal with the invention (εὕρεσις) of 
arguments for use in the three classes of rhetoric (deliberative, 
forensic, epideictic) ; and this topic involves the consideration 
of human affections (πάθη) and varieties of character (ἤθη). 
The third book treats of style (λέξις) and arrangement (τάξις), 
and touches lightly on the subject of delivery (ὑπόκρισις). 
The contents of the twelve chapters of the third book which 
are devoted to the subject of style may be briefly indicated as 
follows. c. 1: introductory, with a glance at delivery (ὑπό- 
κρίσις). C. ii: perspicuity and propriety as two cardinal 
virtues of style. c. iii: faults of taste (in the use of words 
and metaphors), illustrated chiefly from the writings of 
Gorgias and Alcidamas. c. iv: metaphor and simile. c. v: 
purity of language. c. vi: dignity of style. c. vil: propriety 
of style. c. vili: prose rhythm. c. ix: periodic composition. 
c. x: means of enlivening style and of making it vivid. c. xi: 


1 Diog. Laert. iii. 37, φησὶ δ᾽ ᾿Αριστοτέλης τὴν τῶν λόγων ἰδέαν αὐτοῦ μεταξὺ 
ποιήματος εἶναι καὶ πεζοῦ λόγου (see, however, the remarks on this passage in 
Thompson’s edition of the Phaedrus, p. xxiii)—Dionysius’ views as to the 
influence of Gorgias on Plato’s style partly rest on a misapprehension. Reference 
may be made to Norden’s Azmnstprosa, i. pp. 104—113, for a general discussion 
of the poetical and artificial elements in Plato’s writing. 


GREEK STUDY OF STYLE. 15 


further means of attaining vividness. c. xii: the styles appro- 
priate to the three classes of rhetoric. Of Aristotle’s general 
attitude towards the subject of style it will be convenient to 
treat more at length later (pp. 36—4o infra), when some 
characteristic passages will be quoted from the Rhetoric and 
the Poetics. 

As a philosophical treatment of the art of rhetoric 
Aristotle’s treatise has never been equalled. But as a 
practical instrument for the training of public speakers it 
was no doubt surpassed by the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, 
and by various handbooks edited in the lost Συναγωγὴ 
Τεχνῶν of Aristotle. In this work, which was known to 
Cicero, Aristotle collected the rhetorical treatises of his 
predecessors’. It was, therefore, with full knowledge of their 
contents that in the Afetoric he condemned the earlier 
manuals for their unscientific character and assigned a 
secondary position to the question of style. With regard to 
this latter point, however, it should be remembered that the 
subject of style was treated by Aristotle not only in the 
Rhetoric, but also in the Poetics, and probably in the lost 
Theodectea. The statement that he composed a separate 
treatise, or treatises, περὶ λέξεως may have its origin in the 
fact that the Retoric itself was sometimes regarded as a 
composite work and described as τέχναι ῥητορικαί". 

By the publication of the Luvaywyn Τεχνῶν Aristotle 
may well have regarded himself as absolved from the duty 
of making detailed references to his technical predeces- 
sors. But it seems strange that he should take so little 
account of practical orators, whether they had, or had not, 
written Arts of Rhetoric. It is well known that Aristotle 
illustrates his precepts by actual quotations, instead of in- 
venting examples for the occasion, as was done by the 
author of the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, and was probably 
the usual practice. Yet he never quotes Demosthenes, whose 
life almost completely synchronized with his own; and it is 


1 Cic. de Inv. 11. ὃ 6, de Orat. ii. $160, Brut. 846. The surviving fragments of 
the early treatises on rhetoric are brought together in Spengel’s Arteum Scriptores. 
2 Dionysius of Halicarnassus so describes it in Lf. ad Amm. 1. cc. I, 2 etc. 


16 INTRODUCTION. 


doubtful whether he makes more than one (Δ εξ ii. 24, 8) 
reference to him. Lysias, again, is quoted three times at 
most. And though Isocrates is cited repeatedly, there is 
nevertheless little room to doubt the stories current in an- 
tiquity of the rivalry and antipathy existing between him and 
Aristotle during the earlier period of the philosopher’s life. 
In the case of Demosthenes and Aristotle we know of no 
active ill-feeling on either side, though political animosity has 
sometimes been suspected. It remains, however, a remarkable 
fact that the great theorist of rhetoric, and the great master 
of oratory, should be contemporaries and yet should stand 
so entirely apart. It was hardly necessary for Dionysius to 
write his /zrst Letter to Ammacus in order to prove that the 
oratory of Demosthenes could not have been nourished by 
the Rhetoric of Aristotle. But the Letter is valuable as a 
reminder that the two men, the limits of whose lives are 
there shown so closely to coincide, bore traces of that feud 
between the philosophers and the rhetoricians which Plato 
transmitted to future ages. 


IV. Post-ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHICAL AND 
PHILOLOGICAL SCHOOLS. 


(1) Theophrastus. Theophrastus (372-287 B.C.) of 
Eresus, the successor of Aristotle in the Peripatetic School, 
wrote (like his master) on the subject of rhetoric. Of the 
ten rhetorical treatises attributed to Theophrastus by Dio- 
genes Laertius the most important probably was that on 
Style (περὶ Λέξεως). Among the topics included in this 
work seems to have been one which becomes very prominent 
in later writers,—that of the ¢hree types of style. It is probable 
that Theophrastus, who was himself famous for his gift of 
speech, developed considerably, and in a most interesting 
way, the doctrine of style as it came from his master’s hands ; 
and it is much to be regretted that only fragments of his 
rhetorical books have survived’. 


1 1 hope to collect elsewhere the chief fragments of the περὶ Λέξεως and to 
review the scattered references made to the work in antiquity. 


GREEKS SLUDY, OF STYLE. 17 


(2) Demetrius Phalereus and Alexandria. Later 
Peripatetics. Demetrius of Phalerum, a pupil of Theo- 
phrastus, governed Athens during the years 317-307 B.c., and 
died in 283 B.c. It is Demetrius who, with his somewhat florid 
style, marks the first step in that decline of the old Attic 
oratory which Dionysius dates from the death of Alexander 
of Macedon’. It is with him, also, that rhetoric begins to 
assume a specially scholastic character, now that it is no longer 
concerned with great national interests. Rhetorical exercises, 
from his time onward, are invested with undue importance, 
in the dearth of what Dionysius would call ‘real contests’? 


1 Dionys. Halic. de Antig. Orat. c. 1 (quoted and translated in Déonys. of 
Afalic.: the Three Literary Letters, pp. 43, 44).—As the De Llocutione is 
traditionally attributed to Demetrius Phalereus, it may be well to quote the 
following estimates of his style, more especially as the surviving fragments of his 
acknowledged works are scanty : Cic. Brit. 37, 38, ‘ Phalereus enim successit eis 
senibus adulescens, eruditissimus ille quidem horum omnium, sed non tam armis 
institutus quam palaestra. itaque delectabat magis Athenienses quam inflammabat. 
processerat enim in solem et pulverem, non ut e militari tabernaculo, sed ut e 
Theophrasti doctissimi hominis umbraculis. hic primus inflexit orationem et eam 
mollem teneramque reddidit, et suavis, sicut fuit, videri maluit quam gravis: sed 
suavitate ea, qua perfunderet animos, non qua perfringeret: tantum ut memoriam 
concinnitatis suae, non, quemadmodum de Pericle scripsit Eupolis, cum delecta- 
tione aculeos etiam relinqueret in animis eorum, a quibus esset auditus.’ Ζ2024. 285, 
‘in quo etiam illud quaero, Phalereus ille Demetrius Atticene dixerit. mihi 
quidem ex illius orationibus redolere ipsae Athenae videntur. at est floridior, ut 
ita dicam, quam Hyperides, quam Lysias.’ Ov. 92, ‘huic omnia dicendi 
ornamenta conveniunt plurimumque est in hac orationis forma suavitatis ; in qua 
multi floruerunt apud Graecos, sed Phalereus Demetrius meo iudicio praestitit 
ceteris, cuius oratio cum sedate placideque labitur, tum illustrant eam quasi stellae 
quaedam tralata verba atque immutata.’ de Or. 11. 94. ‘posteaquam, exstinctis 
his, omnis eorum memoria sensim obscurata est et evanuit, alia quaedam dicendi 
molliora ac remissiora genera viguerunt. inde Demochares, quem aiunt sororis 
filium fuisse Demostheni; tum Phalereus ille Demetrius, omnium istorum mea 
sententia politissimus, aliique eorum similes exstiterunt.’ de Offic. i. 3, ‘nisi forte 
Demetrius Phalereus in hoc numero haberi potest, disputator subtilis, orator 
parum vehemens, dulcis tamen, ut Theophrasti discipulum possis agnoscere.’ 
Quintil. Zzst. Or. x. 1, 80, ‘ Phalerea illum Demetrium, quamquam is primus 
inclinasse eloquentiam dicitur, multum ingenii habuisse et facundiae fateor, vel ob 
hoc memoria dignum, quod ultimus est fere ex Atticis, qui dici possit orator, quem 
tamen in illo medio genere dicendi praefert omnibus Cicero.’ 

2 Quintil. Zrst. Or. 11. 4, 41, ‘nam fictas ad imitationem fori consiliorumque 
materias apud Graecos dicere circa Demetrium Phalerea institutum fere constat.’ 
—Dionysius’ phrase is ἀληθινοὶ ἀγῶνες, e.g. Ep. ad Pomp. c. 5. 


R. 2 


18 INTRODUCTION. 


Among Demetrius’ own numerous works, as enumerated by 
Diogenes Laertius (v. 80) was a Rhetoric, no longer extant, 
which seems to have contained some interesting contemporary 
observations on the oratory of Demosthenes’. 

Perhaps the chief interest of Demetrius’ literary career lies 
in the fact that he was, as the bibliography given by Diogenes 
shows, a man of the most varied erudition, and that as such 
he was invited by Ptolemy Soter (304-285 B.C.) to assist in 
forming those vast collections of books and other aids to 
study which made Alexandria so great a centre of learning. 
He is, in fact, a sort of link between declining Athens and 
rising Alexandria,—between philosophy and oratory on the 
one hand, and philology and grammar on the other. Thus, 
through Demetrius, the all-embracing learning of Aristotle 
made itself felt in the Library and Museum of Alexandria, 
no less than, through Ptolemy, the enlightened policy of 
Aristotle's pupil Alexander made itself felt in the seat of 
government. But though the Peripatetics at Alexandria, as 
elsewhere, remained faithful to that scientific conception of 
rhetoric which Aristotle had formulated, they do not seem to 
have been able to do much work on their own account. The 
times were unfavourable for the practice of oratory ; and it is 
not too much to say that Demetrius himself was the only 
orator of mark ever produced by the school of Aristotle. 
Nor were rhetorical studies in line with the general movement 
of Alexandrian scholarship, which concerned itself far more 
with the poets of Greece than with its orators. 


1 Plut. Vit. Demosth. c. 11.—The following specimen of Demetrius’ own style 
is preserved by Polybius (xxix. 6), who quotes it with admiration: εἰ yap λάβοιτε 
μὴ χρόνον ἄπειρον, μηδὲ γενεὰς πολλάς, ἀλλὰ πεντήκοντα μόνον ἔτη ταυτὶ τὰ πρὸ 
ἡμῶν, γνοίητ᾽ av ὡς τὸ τῆς τύχης χαλεπὸν ἐνταῦθα" πεντηκοστὸν γὰρ ἔτος οἴεσθ᾽ ἂν 
ἢ Πέρσας ἢ βασιλέα τὸν ἹΤερσῶν, ἢ Μακεδόνας ἢ βασιλέα τὸν Μακεδόνων, εἴ τις 
θεῶν αὐτοῖς προὔλεγε τὸ μέλλον, πιστεῦσαί ποτ᾽ ἄν, ὡς εἰς τοῦτον τὸν καιρὸν Τερσῶν 
μὲν οὐδ᾽ ὄνομα λειφθήσεται τὸ παράπαν, οἱ πάσης σχεδὸν τῆς οἰκουμένης ἐδέσποζον; 
Μακεδόνες δὲ πάσης κρατήσουσιν, ὧν οὐδ᾽ ὄνομα πρότερον ny; ἀλλά πως ἡ πρὸς τὸν 
βίον ἡμῶν ἀσύνθετος τύχη, καὶ πάντα παρὰ τὸν λογισμὸν τὸν ἡμέτερον καινοποιοῦσα, 
καὶ τὴν αὑτῆς δύναμιν ἐν τοῖς παραδόξοις ἐνδεικνυμένη, καὶ νῦν, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, δείκνυσι 
πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις, Μακεδόνας εἰς τὴν ἹΤερσῶν εὐδαιμονίαν εἰσοικίσασα, διότι καὶ τούτοις 
ταῦτα τἀγαθὰ κέχρηκεν, ἕως ἂν ἄλλο τι βουλεύσηται περὶ αὐτῶν. Cp. Blass, Adz. 
Bereds. iil. 2, Ὁ. 348. 


CREEK SHODVAOL SEV ELE. 19 


(3) Pergamus and the Stoics. Pergamus, fostered by 
the Attalids as Alexandria had been by the Ptolemies, came 
into prominence as a literary centre nearly a century later 
than the latter city. In the provision made for learning, it 
largely resembled Alexandria. But its studies had distinctive 
features of their own, amongst them the greater attention 
devoted to rhetoric. The Stoics of Pergamus cultivated 
particularly those branches of rhetoric which lent themselves 
to minute analysis. Consequently they were more at home 
in the province of invention than in that of style, though in 
the latter their love of classification and terminology found 
congenial exercise among tropes and figures and grammatical 
rules. They endeavoured to infuse into rhetoric as much 
logic and grammar as possible, while neglecting the graces 
of style. Among the Stoics as writers there was, at all times, 
something of the austere spirit which caused Marcus Aurelius 
to count it one of the debts he owed to Rusticus that he had 
held aloof from the study of oratory and poetry and from the 
use of elegant language’. Dionysius, in claiming originality 
for his treatise De Compositione Verborum, points out (de Comp. 
c. iv.) that, though the Stoics had given much attention to 
expression, it was syntax rather than composition which they 
were concerned with? 


(4) Other Philosophical Schools. Like the Stoics, the 
Epicureans were regarded in antiquity as careless writers. 
According to Dionysius, Epicurus himself had said that “it 
was easy enough to write®.” Some of his later followers seem, 
however, to have given more care than their master to the art 
of expression. In our own time the rolls from Herculaneum 
have shown that the Epicurean Philodemus of Gadara, a 
contemporary of Cicero, was a diligent student of rhetoric as 
well as of philosophy*. They remind us, in fact, how unsafe 


1M. Aurel. Ant. i. 7, καὶ τὸ ἀποστῆναι ῥητορικῆς καὶ ποιητικῆς καὶ ἀστειολογίας. 
Cp. iil. 5 2ό2α., μήτε κομψεία τὴν διάνοιάν σου καλλωπιζέτω. 

2 Cp. Dionys. of Halic.: the Three Literary Letters, p. 39. 

3 [bid. p. 46, οὐκ ἐπιπόνου τοῦ γράφειν ὄντος, de Comp. Verb. c. 24 fin. Cp. 
Quintil. ii. 17, 15. 

4 Cp. Cic. 2 Pis. c. 29, ‘est autem hic, de quo loquor, non philosophia solum, 


2—2 


20 INTRODUCTION. 


it is to make general statements about the Epicureans, or the 
Stoics, or any other philosophical school of long duration. 
The Cynic school, for instance, might seem remote from 
all literary interests. And yet it has sometimes been thought 
that Antisthenes, the founder of that school, was the first to 
hit upon the fruitful distinction of the types of style. 


V. GRAECO-ROMAN RHETORICAL SCHOOLS. 


(1) Dionysius of Halicarnassus. To understand the 
work done by Dionysius at Rome during the years 30 B.C. 
to ὃ B.C., it is necessary to look back to a time some three 
centuries earlier. When defeated by Demosthenes in the 
oratorical contest of 330 B.c., Aeschines betook himself to 
Rhodes, where he founded a school of rhetoric. It was an 
evil omen that one of the least artistic of the Attic orators 
should thus lead the way in regions where the restraining 
influence of Athens herself could be but little felt. Before 
long an Asiatic style of oratory had arisen, with Hegesias 
of Magnesia as its chief representative’. This non-Attic 


sed etiam ceteris studiis, quae fere [ceteros] Epicureos neglegere dicunt, per- 
politus.’ 

1 The following is a specimen (quoted by Phot. cod. 250 from Agatharchides) 
of the style of Hegesias: ὅμοιον πεποίηκας, ᾿Αλέξανδρε, Θήβας κατασκάψας, ws ἂν 
el ὁ Ζεὺς ἐκ τῆς κατ᾽ οὐρανὸν μερίδος ἐκβάλλοι τὴν σελήνην. τὸν γὰρ ἥλιον ὑπο- 
λείπομαι ταῖς ᾿Αθήναις. δύο γὰρ αὗται πόλεις τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἦσαν ὄψεις. διὸ καὶ 
περὶ τῆς ἑτέρας ἀγωνιῶ νῦν. ὁ μὲν γὰρ εἷς αὐτῶν ὀφθαλμὸς ἡ Θηβαίων ἐκκέκοπται 
πόλις. Another, which is preserved by Strabo Geograph. 396, may be rhythmically 
divided as follows: ὁρῶ τὴν ἀκρόπολιν | kal τὸ περίττης τριαίνης | ἐκεῖθι onpetor. | 
ὁρῶ τὴν ’Enevotva, | καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν γέγονα μύστης. ἐκεῖνο Λεωκόριον" τοῦτο 
Θησεῖον" | οὐ δύναμαι δηλῶσαι | καθ᾽ ἕν ἕκαστον. Cicero parodies the manner of 
Hegesias in ad Ads. xii. 6: ‘de Caelio vide, quaeso, ne quae lacuna sit in auro: | 
ego ista non novi; | sed certe in collubo est detrimenti satis. | huc aurum si 
accedit | —sed quid loquor? | tu videbis. | habes Hegesiae genus! quod Varro 
laudat.’ For further particulars of Hegesias, see D. 27. pp. 12, 45, and σ. Uy. 
pp- 226, 227. Strabo Geograph. 648 speaks of Hegesias as ὁ ῥήτωρ ὃς ἦρξε 
μάλιστα Tod’ Ασιανοῦ λεγομένου ζήλου, παραφθείρας τὸ καθεστηκὸς ἔθος 76’ Αττικόν.--- 
The above specimens show that the style of Hegesias was at once jerky and 
grandiloquent. Another variety of Asianism, with a grandiloquence moving in 


GREEK STUDY OF STYLE. 21 


oratory continued to prevail till the end of the second 
century B.C., when an Atticizing movement set in at Rhodes, 
the way for this having been prepared, earlier in the same 
century, by Hermagoras of Temnus. Hermagoras, confin- 
ing himself almost entirely to invention as opposed to style, 
elaborated on the basis of previous treatises a system of 
rhetoric which remained a standard work throughout the 
Graeco-Roman period’. Around men like Hermagoras, and 
(at a later time) Apollodorus of Pergamus and Theodorus 
of Gadara, gathered rhetorical schools or sects (αἱρέσεις). 
The principal Rhodian rhetoricians—to return to these— 
were Apollonius (120 B.C.) and Molon (80 B.c.). These 
rhetoricians ‘atticized, in the sense that they followed de- 
finite Attic models such as Hyperides, though it is to be 
observed that Cicero and Quintilian assign to the Rhodian 
school a position intermediate between the Attic and the 
Asiatic. 

It was, however, at Rome, and chiefly through the efforts 
of Dionysius and his fellow-worker Caecilius of Calacte 
who had behind them the approval of the Roman governing 
classes of this and earlier times, that Atticism triumphed and 
new life was breathed into rhetorical studies and literary 
criticism. Without entering here into details of the work 
of Dionysius, we may fix our attention upon two points in 
which he appears (largely, perhaps, because of the scanty 
information available with regard to the times preceding 
his own) to occupy an original position. He is the first 
Greek rhetorician of ascertained date in whom we find re- 
ference made to: I. 7zmitation (μίμησις), 2. types of style 
(χαρακτῆρες TOU λόγου). 


1. Imitation. Dionysius’ lost work Ox Imitation (περὶ 
Μιμήσεως) consisted of three books, and was, beyond doubt, 


ampler periods, is illustrated (Norden Kzzstprosa i. 140—145) by the inscription 
which Antiochus of Commagene set up in the first century B.c. and which was 
published by its discoverers (Humann and Puchstein) as recently as the year r89go. 

1 For an attempted reconstruction of the rhetorical system of Hermagoras, 
see G. Thiele, Hermagoras: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Rhetorik. 


22 INTRODUCTION. 


one of his most important literary undertakings’. It embodied 
the principle of the Atticists, that in order to improve con- 
temporary taste and style the old Attic writers must be 
studied and imitated. Individuals might differ as to which 
Attic author should be thus followed, some favouring Lysias, 
others Plato, others Thucydides, others again Demosthenes. 
But all were agreed as to the main point: models for modern 
prose were to be sought in the classical period of Greek 
literature. At what date this idea of zmztation (so different 
from the Aristotelian zzfation as found in the Poetics) first 
arose, we cannot now tell. But to the librarians and biblio- 
graphers of Alexandria and Pergamus must be assigned the 
credit of preserving classical authors for future imitators. 
The Alexandrian men of letters themselves imitated poets 
rather than prose-writers ; the latter may have received greater 
attention at Pergamus. 


2. Types of Style. Dionysius, in his essay on Demo- 
sthenes, distinguishes three types of style——the elevated 
(χαρακτὴρ ὑψηλός), the plain (ἰσχνός), and the middle (μέσος). 
He characterises the elevated, or grand, style as highly 
wrought, uncommon, studied, adorned with every accessory that 
art can furnish, while the plain style is (as its name implies) 
simple and unpretending, and the middle is a combination of 
the two others”. The elevated style is represented by Thucy- 
dides, the plain by Lysias, the middle by Isocrates and Plato. 
In the essay on Demosthenes, and elsewhere, Dionysius seems 
to regard Theophrastus as the author of this threefold classi- 
fication of the varieties of style, although (as we have already 
seen) Antisthenes is sometimes supposed to have invented it. 

Reference has just been made to the indebtedness of 
Dionysius to his predecessors. That indebtedness is great, 

1 Cp. Dionys. Hal., pp. 27—30. The subjects of the three books were: 
1. Imitation in itself, 11. Authors to be imitated, 111. Manner of imitation (Dionys. 
H., Zp. ad Pomp. c. 3). 

> λέξις ἐξηλλαγμένη, περιττή, ἐγκατάσκευος, τοῖς ἐπιθέτοις κόσμοις ἅπασι συμ- 
πεπληρωμένη (de adm. vi dic. in Dem. c. 1); λιτή, ἀφελής, ἀπέριττος (2b. cc. 2, 34); 
ἡ μικτή τε καὶ σύνθετος ἐκ τούτων τῶν δυεῖν, ὁ μεμιγμένος ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων τῶν 
χαρακτήρων (26. cc. 3,15).—For Dionysius’ three ἁρμονίαι or συνθέσεις, reference 
may be made to 2). H. p. 18. 


GREEK STUDY OF STYLE. 23 


and owing to the loss of so large a part of Greek critical litera- 
ture, it constitutes much of his importance for modern readers. 
The formal study of the Attic writers, and more especially of 
the orators, must start from Dionysius because he is the best 
and fullest representative of that ancient theory which, in some 
parts at least, is as old as those writers themselves, and even 
older. But this consideration should not lead us to underrate 
the merits of Dionysius himself. No unbiassed judge can 
read his critical essays attentively without admiring not only 
their extent and variety, but their excellence of workmanship 
and their independence of judgment. Above all, Dionysius’ 
writings are pervaded by an enlightened and contagious 
enthusiasm for good literature, and he is remarkably free 
from that love of technicalities for their own sake which is apt 
to beset the ordinary rhetorician’. 

(2) Roman Writers on Rhetoric. The importance, 
from our present point of view, of the Roman writers on 
rhetoric lies in the fact that they drew largely on Greek 


1 It is to be regretted that so excellent a writer as Eduard Norden, prejudiced 
apparently by the Atticism of Dionysius, should have spoken disdainfully of him : 
**So muss ich doch bekennen, dass mir der von vielen bewunderte Kritikus 
Dionys ein dusserst bornierte Kopf zu sein scheint...... Dionys macht die grossen 
Manner zu ebensolchen Pedanten, wie er, dieser σχολαστικὸς vom reinsten Wasser, 
selbst einer ist...... Bei Dionys ep. ad Pomp. 2, 7 heisst es sehr fein (daher ist es 
nicht von thm), die Hauptstiirke Platons als Schriftsteller zeige sich, ὅταν τὴν 
ἰσχνὴν καὶ ἀκριβῆ Kal δοκοῦσαν μὲν ἀποίητον εἶναι, κατεσκευασμένην δὲ ἀμωμήτῳ 
καὶ ἀφελεῖ κατασκευῇ διάλεκτον εἰσφέρῃ" (Norden, Kwzstprosa, 1. pp- 79, 80, 104). 
The injustice of the italicized words will be manifest to any one who reads, in its 
own context, the passage quoted from Dionysius, which, whether sound criticism 
or not, bears upon it the stamp of original utterance. It will be enough to set 
against the unfavourable judgment of Norden the view recently expressed by a 
literary critic of exceptional range: ‘‘ Dionysius is a very considerable critic, and 
one to whom justice has not usually, if at all, yet been done.... A critic who saw 
far, and for the most part truly, into the proper province of literary criticism.... 
This treatise [sc. the de Compositione Verborum], if studied carefully, must raise 
some astonishment that Dionysius should have been spoken of disrespectfully by 
any one who himself possesses competence in criticism. From more points of 
view than one, the piece gives Dionysius no mean rank as a critic.” (Saintsbury, 
History of Criticism, i. pp- 136, 137, 132.) Is there not room for an English 
edition and translation of the de Composztione, with an introductory sketch of 
(t) ancient prose rhythm, (2) the order of words in the classical (as compared 
with the modern) languages ? 


24 INTRODUCTION. 


sources. Cornificius, for example, the supposed author of 
the Rhetorica ad Herennium (produced about 85 B.C.), men- 
tions the three varieties of style; and he, like Cicero, was 
of earlier date than Dionysius. Cornificius, further, mentions 
zmitation as one of the aids to oratorical proficiency”. 

From Cornificius we pass to Cicero. The earliest of 
Cicero’s rhetorical works, the De Jnventione, coincides in 
many points with the Rhetorica ad Herennium. It follows 
closely the rhetorical system of Hermagoras. The Orazor, 
on the other hand, which was one of the latest of the rhetorical 
series and forms an admirable treatise on style, draws from a 
wider field. Express reference is made in it to Plato, Aristotle, 
and Theophrastus, as well as to Isocrates and his pupils 
Ephorus, Naucrates, and Theodectes. It is probably to 
Theophrastus that Cicero owes the threefold division of style 
(into grand, plain, and intermediate) which he recognises in 
the Orator and elsewhere’®. 

In regard to zwztatzon Cicero maintained the view, held 
later by Dionysius, that Demosthenes was the best model for 
oratory, as combining in his own person the three types of 
style. Whereas contemporary Roman Atticists were found 
to select for exclusive imitation either difficult and elaborate 
writers like Thucydides or at the other end of the scale clear 
and natural writers like Lysias, Cicero saw that all such efforts 
were mistaken. Perhaps his own Asiatic leanings, as well 
as his delicate perception of the different genius of the 
two languages, made him particularly averse from artificial 


1 Rhet. ad Her. iv. ὃ, 11 (ed. Marx): ‘sunt igitur tria genera, quae genera nos 
figuras appellamus, in quibus omnis oratio non vitiosa consumitur : unam graven, 
alteram smedzocrem, tertiam extenwatam vocamus. gravis est quae constat ex 
verborum gravium levi et ornata constructione; mediocris est quae constat ex 
humiliore neque tamen ex infima et pervulgatissima verborum dignitate ; attenuata 
est quae demissa est usque ad usitatissimam puri consuetudinem sermonis.’ 

2 /bid. i. 2, 3: ‘haec omnia tribus rebus adsequi poterimus: arte, imitatione, 
exercitatione. ars est praeceptio quae dat certam viam rationemque dicendi: 
imitatio est qua impellimur cum diligenti ratione ut aliquorum similes in dicendo 
valeamus esse: exercitatio est adsiduus usus consuetudoque dicendi.’ 

3 The ¢ria genera dicendi indicated in Orator § 21 are the grande, medium and 
tenue. Cp. de Or. 111. 177, ‘itaque tum graves sumus, tum subtiles, tum medium 
quiddam tenemus.’ See also de Opt. Gen. Or. 2. 


GREEK STUDY OF STYLE. 25 


attempts to write Latin with a calculated simplicity when 
neither the evasive charm of Lysias nor the native beauty 
of his Attic Greek was at the writer’s command! 

It may be added here that an older contemporary of 
Cicero, Varro, wrote a περὶ Χαρακτήρων, a work which seems 
to have treated of the types of style and to have been drawn 
from Greek sources. The Ars Poetica of Horace was pro- 
bably based on a Greek treatise by Neoptolemus of Parium, 
an Alexandrian writer. A principal purpose of Horace in 
writing his letter to the Pisos seems to have been to enjoin 
the incessant study of the great Greek models :— 


vos exemplaria Graeca 
nocturna versate manu, versate diurna?. 


In the tenth book of the /zstitutio Oratoria Quintilian 
reviews the Greek authors from whom the Roman student 
of style may learn useful lessons; and in so doing, he 
exhibits many points of contact (in most cases probably 
due to the use of the same Greek sources) with the De 
Imitatione of Dionysius. In the Twelfth Book he refers 
briefly to the traditional division of the types of style: 
“altera est divisio, quae in tres partes et ipsa discedit, qua 
discerni posse etiam recte dicendi genera inter se videntur. 
namque unum szbtile, quod ἐσχνόν vocant, alterum grande 
atque vobustum, quod ἀδρόν dicunt, constituunt; tertium alii 
medium ex duobus, alii florzdum (namque id ἀνθηρόν ap- 
pellant) addiderunt” (Quintil. /zs¢. Or. xii. 10, 58). A good 
example of Quintilian’s gift of literary appreciation is the 
passage in which he praises Demosthenes’. 


(3) ‘Longinus.’ The author of the De Sudblimztate, like 
Quintilian and like Tacitus (whose Dzalogus de Oratoribus 


1 That Cicero, in his own day, was attacked as Asiatic, may be seen from 
Quintil. Zzst. Or. xii. 10, 12 and Tac. Dzal. de Or. c. 18. 

2 Hor., Ep. ad Pis., 268. 

3 Quintil. Zzst. Or. x. τ, 76: ‘oratorum longe princeps Demosthenes ac 
paene lex orandi fuit: tanta vis in eo, tam densa omnia, ita quibusdam nervis 
intenta sunt, tam nihil otiosum, is dicendi modus, ut nec quod desit in eo nec 
quod redundet invenias.’ 


26 INTRODUCTION. 


offers some curious points of resemblance to the Greek 
treatise both in the accident of its disputed authorship and 
in the more important particular of its lament for the decay 
of eloquence), probably belongs to the first century A.D.’ In 
form the book is a literary letter which starts with a criticism 
of the treatise written upon the same subject by Caecilius, the 
friend and younger contemporary of Dionysius”. Its subject, 
therefore, is ὕψος (the sublime, elevation of style) and the five 
sources of ὕψος, viz. thought, passion, figures, diction, com- 
position. It cannot be said that the three types of style are 
clearly recognised in the De Sublimitate, though in c. 33 αἱ 
ὑπερμεγέθεις φύσεις are distinguished from τὰς μὲν ταπεινὰς 
καὶ μέσας φύσεις. But the ὕψος which the treatise extols 
is closely related to the μεγαλοπρέπεια of other rhetoricians.— 
The question of zzztation is eloquently treated in cc. 13, 14%. 


1 The question of the date and authorship of the De Sublimitate is of much 
less importance than the due appreciation of a work so long neglected. Here 
again it will be well to quote the judgment of a modern critic: ‘‘His work 
remains towering among all other work of the class, the work of a critic at once 
Promethean and Epimethean in his kind, learning by the mistakes of all that had 
gone before, and presaging, with instinctive genius, much that was not to come 
for centuries after” (Saintsbury, H7zstory of Criticism, 1. 174). 

2 In style Caecilius favoured ἰσχνότης, ‘Longinus’ ὕψος, Dionysius the χαρακτὴρ 
μέσος. 

3 Τῇ his own style the author of the De Swblimitate, like Plato, whom he 
imitates, occasionally uses poetical words. Nor does he disdain the use of 
parisosis and homoeoteleuton. His love of rhythm leads him sometimes to invert 
the natural order of words, and also to sacrifice brevity. The treatise opens with 
a most elaborately constructed sentence: τὸ μὲν τοῦ Κεκιλίου συγγραμμάτιον | ὃ 
περὶ ὕψους συνετάξατο | ἀνασκοπουμένοις ἡμῖν ws οἶσθα κοινῇ | Ποστούμιε +Pdw- 
ρεντιανὲ φίλτατε | ταπεινότερον ἐφάνη τῆς ὅλης ὑποθέσεως | καὶ ἥκιστα τῶν καιρίων 
ἐφαπτόμενον οὐ πολλήν τε ὠφέλειαν | ἧς μάλιστα δεῖ στοχάζεσθαι τὸν γράφοντα] 
περιποιοῦν τοῖς ἐντυγχάνουσιν, κτὰᾺ.---Τἴ may be interesting here to add (from Blass, 
Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch, p. 274) two of the best constructed 
periods in the Greek Testament. The author of the first was, it will be re- 
membered, a physician and so a man likely to have enjoyed a good literary educa- 
tion. (τ) ἐπειδήπερ πολλοὶ ἐπεχείρησαν | ἀνατάξασθαι διήγησιν περὶ τῶν πεπληρο- 
φορημένων ἐν ἡμῖν πραγμάτων | καθὼς παρέδοσαν ἡμῖν οἱ ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται καὶ 
ὑπηρέται γενόμενοι τοῦ λόγου | ἔδοξε κἀμοὶ παρηκολουθηκότι ἄνωθεν πᾶσιν ἀκριβῶς | 
καθεξῆς σοι γράψαι κράτιστε Θεόφιλε | ἵνα ἐπιγνῷς περὶ ὧν κατηχήθης λόγων τὴν 
ἀσφάλειαν. Ἐν. Luc. zit. (2) πολυμερῶς καὶ πολυτρόπως πάλαι ὁ θεὸς λαλήσας 
τοῖς πατράσιν ἐν τοῖς προφήταις | ἐπ᾿ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν 
υἱῷ | ὃν ἔθηκεν κληρονόμον πάντων | δι᾿ οὗ καὶ ἐποίησεν τοὺς αἰῶνας | ὃς ὧν ἀπαύγασμα 


GREEK STUDY OF STVLE. 27 


The great merit of the Swéblme is that it fires the 
reader with the love of noble literature, and forces him to ap- 
prehend the vast difference between correctness and creative 
power, between talent and genius. The author is a rhetori- 
cian who would have seen at a glance the surpassing greatness 
of Shakespeare, however ignorant Shakespeare might have 
shown himself of the Fzgwres catalogued in (say) Puttenham’s 
Arte of English Poeste. 


(4) Hermogenes. The last name we need mention is 
that of Hermogenes of Tarsus (170 A.D.), who elaborated a 
system of rhetoric which long remained supreme. The im- 
portance of Hermogenes, in regard to the present survey, is 
that he does not recognise the three types, but a number of 
qualities (ἰδέαι), of style. The qualities are seven in number: 
clearness, grandeur, beauty, poignancy, characterisation, truth, 
mastery’. The last quality is shown in the successful applica- 
tion of the other six”. By Hermogenes, as by Dionysius two 
centuries earlier, Demosthenes is regarded as the best model 
for oratorical imitation. Probably this fact was now so gene- 
rally allowed that the earlier classification of writers according 
to styles seemed out of date and useless. The types of style 
had served their day ; one had been added to the other, and 
the distinctions between them had worn thinner and thinner. 
It may well have seemed that the only thing left was to 
assume a number of general qualities of style and to regard 
Demosthenes as displaying them all with brilliant effect. 


τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ | φέρων τε τὰ πάντα TH ῥήματι τῆς 
δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ | καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος | ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγα- 
λωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς | τοσούτῳ κρείττων γενόμενος τῶν ἀγγέλων | ὅσῳ διαφορώτερον 
παρ᾽ αὐτοὺς κεκληρονόμηκεν ὄνομα. Ep. ad Hebr. ἐγ. 

1 σαφήνεια, μέγεθος, κάλλος, γοργότης, ἦθος, ἀλήθεια, δεινότης. 

2 Hermog. π. ἰδ. ii. g ἡ δεινότης ἡ περὶ τὸν λόγον ἐστὶ μὲν κατ᾽ ἐμὴν γνώμην 
οὐδὲν ἀλλ᾽ ἢ χρῆσις ὀρθὴ πάντων τῶν τε προειρημένων εἰδῶν τοῦ λόγου καὶ τῶν 
ἐναντίων αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἔτι δ ὧν ἑτέρων σῶμα λόγου γίνεσθαι πέφυκε. τὸ γὰρ εἰς δέον 
καὶ κατὰ καιρὸν καὶ τὸ οὕτως ἢ ἐκείνως εἰδέναι τε καὶ δύνασθαι χρῆσθαι πᾶσί τε 
λόγων εἴδεσι καὶ πάσαις ἀντιθέσεσι καὶ πίστεσι ἐννοίαις τε προκαταρκτικαῖς ἢ κατα- 
στατικαῖς ἢ καὶ ἐπιλογικαῖς, ἁπλῶς τε ὅπερ ἔφην, τὸ πᾶσι τοῖς πεφυκόσι σῶμα λόγου 
ποιεῖν χρῆσθαι δύνασθαι δεόντως καὶ κατὰ καιρὸν ἡ ὄντως οὖσα δεινότης ἐμοί γε εἶναι 
doxet.—Some passages of Hermogenes will be found translated in Jebb’s “122. Or. 


ii. pp- 73, 298. 


28 INTRODUCTION. 


B. CONTENTS OF THE DE ELOCUTIONE. GENERAL 
ASPECTS OF GREEK STYLISTIC STUDY. 


In the following summary, as in the printed text, the 
division into chapters, which is adopted simply for con- 
venience, has no manuscript authority. The division into 
sections has tradition, as well as utility, to recommend it, 
having been introduced by Petrus Victorius for the purpose 
of the translation and notes in his edition of 1562. It stands 
on a very different footing from that division of the New 
Testament into verses which Robert Stephanus is said to 
have made some years earlier (1551), when journeying on 
horseback (zzter eqguitandum, as his son tells us) between 
Paris and Lyons. A minute subdivision, ill-suited for narra- 
tive and epistle, serves conveniently enough for the precepts 
of a rhetorical treatise. 


SUMMARY. 


L. Preliminary Remarks on the Period, ete. 


§§ 1—8. The ‘members’ (κῶλα) : and their appropriate length. 

§9. ‘The ‘phrase’ (κόμμα). 

ὅδ το, 11 ff. The period (περίοδος). 

δὲ r2—18. The periodic and the disjointed style (ἑρμηνεία κατε- 
στραμμένη, ἑρμηνεία διῃρημένη). Number of members in a period. 

§ 19. The historical period (περίοδος ἱστορική). 

§ 20. ‘The rhetorical period (περίοδος ῥητορική). 

§ 21. The conversational period (περίοδος διαλογική). 

§§ 22-24. Periods formed of contrasted members (ἐξ ἀντικει- 
μένων κώλων περίοδοι). 

§ 25. Symmetrical members (κῶλα παρόμοια). 

§§ 26—29. Members with similar terminations (ὁμοιοτέλευτα). 
Cautions with regard to their use. 

§§ 30—33. The enthymeme (ἐνθύμημα). Difference between 
enthymeme and period. 

S§ 34, 35. The member (κῶλον) as defined by Aristotle and 
Archedemus. 


1 A list of the Greek headings found in P 1741 will be given later, in the 
course of the critical footnotes. 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. ° 29 


Ll. The four Types of Style.—The Elevated Style. 


δὲ 36, 37. The four types of style (χαρακτῆρες τῆς ἑρμηνείας) 
are: the plain (ἰσχνός), the elevated (μεγαλοπρεπής), the elegant 
(γλαφυρός), the forcible (δεινός). 


S$ 38—127. General subject: the elevated style (χαρακτὴρ peya- 
λοπρεπής, 5. λόγιος), with the following subdivisions :— 

(1) Elevation in composition or arrangement, σύνθεσις peya- 
λοπρεπής, δὲ 38. 74; 

(2) Elevation in subject-matter, πράγματα μεγαλοπρεπῆ (= διά- 
νοια μεγαλοπρεπής), S$ 75, 76; 

(3) Elevation in diction, λέξις μεγαλοπρεπής, S$ 77—113 ; 

(4) Frigidity (τὸ ψυχρόν) as the correlative vice of the elevated 
style, δὲ 114127. [Like elevation, frigidity arises at 
three points: (1) διάνοια, (2) λέξις, (3) σύνθεσις. The 
very acme of frigidity is reached in hyperbole, δὲ 124— 
126. | 


Subsidiary topics in the following sections :— 
δὲ 5967. Figures of Speech (σχήματα λέξεως). 
δὲ 68—74. Hiatus (σύγκρουσις φωνηέντων). 
§$§ 78—88. Metaphor (μεταφορα). 
$$ 89, 90. Simile (εἰκασία) and imagery (παραβολή). 
δὲ 9193. Onomatopoeic or coined words (ὀνόματα πεποιη- 
μένα). 
$$ g997—102. Allegory (ἀλληγορία). 
§§ 103105. Brevity, aposiopesis, indirect and harsh-sounding 
expressions, etc. 
ἃς 106—111. Epiphoneme (ἐπιφώνημα). 
§§ 112, 113. Poetical colour in prose (τὸ ποιητικὸν ἐν λόγοις). 


TTI. The Elegant Style. 


δὲ 128—189. General subject: the elegant style (χαρακτὴρ yAa- 
φυρός), with the following subdivisions and topics :— 
(1) Charm and gaiety of expression, χαριεντισμὸς καὶ ἱλαρὸς 
λόγος, §§ 128—172. 
(2) Kinds of grace and their elements, εἴδη τῶν χαρίτων καὶ 
ἐν τίσιν, §§ 128—136. 


30 INTRODUCTION. 


(ὁ) Sources of grace, τόποι τῆς χάριτος, S$ 137—162. 


(a) Sources in diction and composition, τόποι τῆς 
λέξεως καὶ τῆς συνθέσεως : Figures, etc. $§ 137— 
155. 

(8) Sources in subject-matter, τόποι τῶν πραγμάτων: 
Proverbs, Fables, Comparisons, Hyperboles, etc. 
S$ 156—162. 


(c) Difference between the ridiculous (τὸ γελοῖον) and the 
charming (τὸ εὔχαρι), δὲ 163—172. 
(2) Elegant diction, beautiful and smooth words (λέξις γλα- 
φυρά : ὀνόματα καλὰ καὶ λεῖα), δὲ 173—178. 
(3) Elegant composition, σύνθεσις γλαφυρά, S§ 179—185. 


(4) Affected style (χαρακτὴρ κακόζηλος) as the correlative vice 
of the elegant style, S$ 186—189. 


LV. The Plain Style. 


δὲ I90—235. General subject: the plain style (χαρακτὴρ ἰσχνός), 
with the following subdivisions :— 


(1) Plain subject-matter, πράγματα icxva, § 190. 
(2) Plain diction, λέξις ἰσχνή, S$ 190, 191. 
(3) Plain composition, σύνθεσις ἰσχνή, S§ 204—208. 
(4) Arid style (χαρακτὴρ ξηρός) as the correlative vice of the 
plain style, S§ 236—239. 
Subsidiary topics in the following sections :— 
δὲ 191—203- Concerning clearness, περὶ τῆς σαφηνείας. [Also: 


concerning stage-style and concerning repetition, περὶ ὑπο- 
κριτικῶν Kal περὶ ἐπαναλήψεως, S$ 194 ff.] 


S$ 209-220. Concerning vividness, περὶ τῆς ἐναργείας. 
δὲ 221, 222. Concerning persuasiveness, περὶ τῆς πιθανότητος. 
S$ 223—235. Concerning the epistolary style, περὶ τοῦ ém- 


στολικοῦ χαρακτῆρος. This is to be regarded (cp. ὃ 235) 
as a blend of the plain and the graceful styles. 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 31 


V. The Forcible Style. 


$§ 240—304. General subject: the forcible style (χαρακτὴρ δεινός), 
with the following subdivisions :— 


(1) Forcible subject-matter, πράγματα δεινά, ὃ 240. 
(2) Forcible composition, σύνθεσις dewvy, S§ 241—271. 
(3) Forcible diction, λέξις δεινή, S§ 272—286. 
(4) Concerning the graceless style, περὶ τοῦ ἀχάριτος χαρακ- 
τῆρος, δὴ 301—304. 
Subsidiary topics :— 
δὲ 287298. Concerning figured language, περὶ τοῦ ἐσχημα- 
; τισμένου λόγου. 
$$ 299, 300. Concerning hiatus in forcible passages, περὶ 


; ; 
συγκρούσεως ἐν δεινότητι. 


It would no doubt be possible, with a little straining, 
to give an appearance of greater symmetry to the above 
summary. But, in truth, the περὶ ‘Epynvetas is not altogether 
systematic. It contains a number of digressions and repe- 
titions. The digressions may be inferred from the above 
analysis, in which an endeavour has been made to mark 
out the ground-plan of the work as clearly as possible. 
Sometimes the author himself indicates a digression, as in 
§ 178 (ταῦτα μὲν δὴ παρατεχνολογείσθω ἄλλως. τῶν δὲ 
εἰρημένων ὀνομάτων τὰ λεῖα μόνα ληπτέον ὡς γλαφυρόν 
τι ἔχοντα). What he here means is that it was relevant to 
discuss ὀνόματα λεῖα in connexion with the χαρακτὴρ yAadupos, 
but not relevant to discuss ὀνόματα ὀγκηρά, κτλ. Of repe- 
titions examples will be found in § 121, 220, 243, 248, if these 
are compared respectively with §§ 6, 94, 99, 31. On the 
whole, however, despite repetitions and digressions, the 
treatise wears an unpretending and business-like air; and 
this largely because it wastes few words in making its points 
and has no formal introduction or conclusion. 

Though the treatise is uneven in execution, it has many 
general excellences as well as numberless merits of detail. 

1 The isregularity of structure may, to a certain extent, be intended to avoid 


monotony, as when (in the treatment of the types of style) πράγματα, σύνθεσις, and 
λέξις are arranged in almost every possible order. 


32 INTRODUCTION. 


Its chief general excellence is that it brings a refined taste, 
and a diligent study of Greek literature, to bear upon the 
important subject of the types of style. Among merits of 
detail (and it is by the success with which definite points 
of detail are handled that such a treatise must mainly be 
judged), we may mention its appreciation (after Theophrastus) 
of the fact that distinction of style is shown as much in what 
is omitted as in what is said (§ 222), and its corresponding 
reference (ὃ 288) to Plato’s reticence in the Phaedo and 
to the delicacy with which Ctesias makes his messenger ‘break 
the news’ (§ 216); in the personal touches which seem to 
show that the author understood the value of the precept 
laudando praecipere (§ 295), and that he had an eye for good 
acting (§ 195) and some sense of humour (§ 79, 297); in 
his hints as to the appropriate employment of hyperbole 
(§ 52) or of natural expression (ὃ 27, 28, 300), of omitted 
or reiterated conjunctions (§§ 64, 63), of accumulated figures 
(§§ 61, 62, 268), of verbal music (§§ 184, 185, 69, 174), of graceful 
themes and expression (§§ 132 ff.), of the periodic and resolved 
styles in combination (ὃ 15)!; or in his similarly felicitous 
warnings against the dangers of bombast (§§ 121, 304)" 

The traditional title of the treatise is περὶ ᾿Ερμηνείας, 
the best available rendering of which in English is Concerning 
Style. The word ἑρμηνεία occurs in the opening section, where 
by τὴν ἑρμηνείαν τὴν λογικήν 15 meant Prose-writing*®. The 
usual Greek term for sty/e is that employed by Aristotle and 
Theophrastus, λέξις. It may be that the use of ἑρμηνεία in 
this sense was favoured by the Isocratic school of rhetoricians, 
since approximations to it are found in the Khetorica ad 
Alexandrum'*. 

The framework of the treatise is supplied, as will have 

1 The same judicious regard for variety is seen in the treatment of hiatus (§ 68), 
and of the types of style (§§ 36, 37). 

2 Among longer passages, §§ 223235 are specially interesting as an early 
example of ‘‘How to Write a Letter” (πῶς δεῖ ἐπιστέλλειν is the heading in P),— 
of the Polite Art of Letter- Writing. 

3 Or prose-composition, in the wide modern sense of the word comfosztion. 

4 For a further discussion of the word ἑρμηνεία, reference may be made to the 


Glossary (s. v.). 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 33 


been seen, by a description of the four types of style 
(χαρακτῆρες τῆς ἑρμηνείας). It will, consequently, be con- 
venient to give here a slightly more detailed and connected 
account of the characteristics assigned to these styles than 
a tabular analysis can supply. 


At the outset it is made clear that any one of the four types 
will blend with any other, the only exception being that the elevated 
type will not unite with the plain type, of which it is the direct 
opposite. The union of elevation, force and grace, is seen in 
Homer’s poetry, in Plato’s dialogues, and in the writings of 
Xenophon, Herodotus, and many others. The elevated style 
has three aspects: the thought, the diction, and the com- 
position. Paeonic rhythm, at the beginning and the end of the 
‘members,’ contributes to elevated composition: e.g. Thucyd. ii. 
48, ἤρξατο δὲ τὸ κακὸν ἐξ Αἰθιοπίας. Long ‘members’ and rounded 
periods have the like effect: e.g. Thucyd. 11. 102, ὁ yap ᾿Αχελῴῷος κ-τ.λ. 
Elevation is also favoured by harsh sounds, hiatus, conjunctions ; 
and by figures such as anthypallage, epanaphora, anadiplosis. In 
elevated diction metaphors, brief comparisons, compound and coined 
words (ὀνόματα πεποιημένα) should be employed, and a sparing 
use made of allegory. Thucydides is regarded as the leading 
example of the elevated style. ‘The vice corresponding to elevation 
is frigidity, of which a definition is given from Theophrastus. 
Frigidity, like elevation, shows itself in thought, diction and com- 
position,—in senseless hyperbole, in exaggerated expressions, in 
sentences unrhythmical on the one hand or metrical on the other. 
δὲ 36—127. 

The elegant type has charm and vivacity. The subject-matter 
may be charming in itself. But expression can make it still more 
so. The means employed are such as harmless pleasantries; pointed 
brevity; significant words added unexpectedly at the end of a 
sentence; the figures azadiplosis, anaphora, and the like; the use 
of proverbs, fables, comparisons, hyperboles; the use likewise of 
beautiful and smooth words. In elegant composition some approach 
to metrical effects is admissible. Illustrations of the graceful style 
are quoted from Sappho. among poets and Xenophon among prose- 
writers, while (in addition to Xenophon) Plato and Herodotus, and 
in some degree Demosthenes, are held to exemplify this style in 
the special province of composittion.—The perverted variety of the 


R. 3 


34 INTRODUCTION. 


elegant type is the affected or mannered style, which in composition 
particularly affects anapaestic rhythms. §§ 128—189. 

The plain type (of which Lysias may be taken as the re- 
presentative) aims at clearness and simplicity, and draws on the 
language of ordinary life. It avoids strange compounds, as well as 
coined words, asyndeton, and all ambiguities. It favours efanalepsis, 
or the repetition of connecting particles for the sake of clearness ; 
with the same object, it will say one thing twice over; it avoids 
dependent constructions, and adopts the natural order of words; 
it employs simple periods, but shuns long ‘members,’ the clashing 
of long vowels and diphthongs, and the use of striking figures. 
This type possesses the qualities of vividness and persuasiveness. 
By a wise economy of language it says neither too much nor too 
little, and leaves the impression of directness and sincerity. Its 
obverse is the dry, or arid, type. This is illustrated in the three 
aspects of thought, diction, and composition. §§ 1g0—239. 

The forcible type (of which no representative is named, though 
Demosthenes is oftenest quoted in illustration) affects a pregnant 
brevity of expression, such as that of the Lacedaemonians. Proverbs 
and allegories may be employed with effect in the forcible style. 
The close of the period will be strongly marked; ‘ phrases’ will be 
preferred to ‘members’; harshness of sound will not be shunned ; 
antithesis and rhyming terminations will be avoided; afoszopesis 
will be serviceable, and so generally will any form of speech which 
implies more than it says. Mordant wit contributes to force, and 
the same may be said of such figures as prosopopoera, anadiplosis, 
anaphora, asyndeton, climax. Forcible diction is the outcome of 
metaphors, short comparisons, striking compounds, apt expressions, 
rhetorical questions, euphemism, allegory, hyperbole, figured speech, 
hiatus. The vicious extreme of the forcible type is the graceless 
style, which is closely allied to frigidity. §§ 240—304". 


A general view of the entire contents of the περὶ ‘Epunvetas 
shows that the treatise answers to its title.—that it is con- 
cerned throughout with s¢y/e, in that broad sense of the term 


1 In this sketch of the characteristics of the various types of style as described 
by Demetrius much help has been derived from Volkmann, Rhetortk der Griechen 
und Roimer*, pp. 539—544.—It will be noticed that some of the figures may be 
appropriately used in more than one of the types. 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 35 


which will include diction and composition’. The thought 
(or subject-matter), as distinguished from the expression, is 
but cursorily treated. It is pointed out in § 75 that a great 
subject may be spoiled by poor writing, and conversely in 
§§ 133, 134 that good subjects can be enhanced, and un- 
pleasant subjects rendered attractive, by a writer’s skill. In 
§ 76 the remark is made that “the painter Nicias regarded 
the subject itself as part of the pictorial art, just as plot and 
legend are a part of poetry”; and the author of the περὶ 
ἝἙρμηνείας himself shows, in his own treatment of his chosen 
theme, how difficult, or rather how impossible, it is to 
discriminate precisely between substance and form? Yet for 
practical purposes the distinction is a useful and necessary 
one, as we see at once if we look at the surviving body of 
Greek criticism. Divide this body for our present purpose 
into two parts® (viz. (1) Aristotle, (2) Dionysius of Hali- 
carnassus, the περὶ Ὕψους, the περὶ “Eppnvetas), and we 
recognise at once that, on the whole, the first part is more 
occupied with substance than with form, and that (again 
on the whole) the second part is more occupied with form 
than with substance*. The historical and personal reasons 

1 Diction covering the choice of words, and composztzon the structure of sen- 
tences and the rhythm of the period. 

» The interfusion, or marriage, of substance and form, and the evils of exagge- 
rated attention to the latter, are happily described by Quintilian, Zys¢. Orat. viii. 
Prooem. 20—22: ‘‘curam ergo verborum rerum volo esse sollicitudinem. nam ple- 
rumque optima rebus cohaerent et cernuntur suo lumine; at nos quaerimus illa, 
tanquam lateant seseque subducant. itaque nunquam putamus circa id esse, de quo 
dicendum est, sed ex aliis locis petimus et inventis vim afferimus. maiore animo 
aggredienda eloquentia est, quae si toto corpore valet, ungues polire et capillum 
reponere non existimabit ad curam suam pertinere.”—Dionysius (de /socr. c. 12) 
agrees with Quintilian in subordinating the words to the sense, if any such distinc- 
tion should be made: βούλεται δὲ ἡ φύσις τοῖς νοήμασιν ἕπεσθαι τὴν λέξιν, οὐ TH 
λέξει τὰ νοήματα. Dionysius himself accordingly, in his literary estimates, discusses 
fully the πραγματικὸς τόπος (which taxes to the utmost the maturest powers, de 
Comp. Verb. c. 1), as well as the λεκτικὸς τόπος. 

° The distinction made above is intended simply to imply that λέξις receives 
comparatively far more attention in Dionysius, in the 7. ὕψους, and in the π. ἑρμ.» 
than in Aristotle. In particular, such minute analysis as Dionysius gives of the 
literary styles of individual authors is found in the extant work neither of Aristotle 
nor of any other Greek critic. 

4 In his article ‘ Poetry’ in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Mr Theodore Watts- 


3—2 


36 INTRODUCTION. 


for this in the case of Aristotle have already been glanced 
at. But the general question of Aristotle’s attitude to style 
requires some attention, if we are to form a fair estimate 
‘of it in itself and to compare it satisfactorily with that of 
the later Greek writers. 

On the one hand it must be admitted that Aristotle, in 
his writings as they have come down to us, does treat the 
subject of style in such a way as to afford some just ground 
for the disappointment so often expressed by admirers of 
his surpassing genius. ‘It is not simply that invention is 
discussed at much greater length than style, and that the 
latter finds no place in his definition of rhetoric: all this 
we might have anticipated for various reasons which need 
not now be stated’. Nor is it simply that, in the compara- 
tively small space allotted to style, questions grammatical 
rather than literary are sometimes raised: this is a feature 
which Aristotle’s works share with the critical treatises of 
antiquity generally, and historically the confusion is as 
natural as is the great interest shown in what now seem 
peculiarly arid points of grammar. The substantial fact is 
that, when all allowance has been made for the fragmentary 
condition of the Poetzcs and for the oratorical preoccupation 
of the Third Book of the Rhetoric, Aristotle says but little 
about the beauties of elevated and poetical language. The 
disappearance of the grand style in the poetry of his own 
century seems to cause him no concern (//4ez. iii. 1, 9), nor 
does he appear to observe the corresponding decline in 


Dunton says: ‘‘Perhaps the first critic who tacitly revolted against the dictum that 
substance, and not form, is the indispensable basis of poetry was Dionysius of 
Halicarnassus, whose treatise upon the arrangement of words is really a very fine 
piece of literary criticism....The Aristotelian theory as to invention, however, 
dominated all criticism after as well as before Dionysius.’ This statement is inte- 
resting and suggestive. It is, however, subject to the qualification that the later 
critics, such as Dionysius, probably drew largely from Theophrastus’ lost περὶ 
Λέξεως, which seems to have been a separate and substantial work. 

1 That Aristotle includes in his definition of rhetoric invention only, and not 
expression, is pointed out by Quintilian: “nihil nisi inventionem complecitur, quae 
sine elocutione non est oratio” (Zs¢. Or. ii. 15, 13). Aristotle’s definition runs as 
follows: ἔστω δὴ ῥητορικὴ δύναμις περὶ ἕκαστον τοῦ θεωρῆσαι τὸ ἐνδεχόμενον πιθανόν 


(het. i. c. 2 init.). 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 37 


poetical genius. It is true that Aristotle was a great 
scientific thinker living in an age of prose. But among the 
contemporary oratorical prose, some of whose secrets (as it 
seems to modern readers) might have been usefully discussed 
in the Rhetoric, was that of Demosthenes; and this is 
practically ignored. Aristotle’s omissions on the aesthetic 
side are supplied by the Graeco-Roman critics, and the 
Treatise on the Sublime eloquently proclaims how far true 
genius transcends mere correctness and propriety. 

On the other hand, if we desire a definition of good 
style, where shall we find a better than that given by Aristotle 
himself in the Poetics: “The perfection of style is to be 
clear without being mean!”? It is implied in these words 
that good style has virtues as well as graces, graces as well 
as virtues. Or, to adopt a distinction found in the later 
critics, there are in style not only necessary virtues (ἀρεταὶ 
ἀναγκαῖαι), but accessory virtues (ἀρεταὶ ἐπίθετοι). Clear- 
ness (σαφήνεια) was included in the former category; and 
like its allied virtues of brevity (συντομία) and purity 
( Ελληνισμός), it was perhaps less systematically taught than 
those accessory arts (such as the heightening of style) which, 
according to Dionysius, best reveal an orator’s power*® 
Clearness is, it may be, best inculcated through examples 
of its opposite, as when oracular ambiguities are illustrated 
by Aristotle (RZez. iii. 5, 4), or as when Dionysius condemns 
the obscurity of Thucydides (de Thucyd. cc. 50, 51). Some 
positive precepts of a useful kind are, however, given in 
the De Elocutione, S 196—198, with the curious addition 
(§ 203) that clearness must be studied most of all in the plain 


1 Aristot. Poet. xxii. 1: λέξεως δὲ ἀρετὴ σαφῆ καὶ μὴ ταπεινὴν εἶναι (S. H. 
Butcher’s translation). That Aristotle intended the definition to apply substantially 
to prose as well as poetry is clear from Rhet. iii. 2, 1: ὡρίσθω λέξεως ἀρετὴ σαφῆ 
εἶναι. σημεῖον yap ὅτι ὁ λόγος, ἐὰν μὴ δηλοῖ, οὐ ποιήσει τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἔργον" καὶ μήτε 
ταπεινὴν μήτε ὑπὲρ τὸ ἀξίωμα, ἀλλὰ πρέπουσαν" ἡἣ γὰρ ποιητικὴ ἴσως οὐ ταπεινή, ἀλλ᾽ 
οὐ πρέπουσα λόγῳ. 

? A list of both kinds will be found in D. H. (Dionysius of Halicarnassus: the 
Three Literary Letters), p. 172. 

3 Dionys. Hal. de Thucyd. c. 23, ἐξ ὧν μάλιστα διάδηλος ἡ τοῦ ῥήτορος γίνεται 
δύναμις. 


38 INTRODUCTION. 


or unadorned type of composition. As the more showy 
parts of style are so apt to engross attention, it was a 
great thing that Aristotle should have assigned to perspicuity 
the first place in his definition’, This gives that indispens- 
able quality the emphasis which Quintilian laid upon it when 
he said that the speaker must look to it that his hearer shall 
not merely understand, but shall find it absolutely impossible 
to misunderstand’. 

In the same passage Quintilian points out that a speaker 
gains little credit for mere correctness and clearness; if he 
employs no artistic embellishment, he seems rather to be 
free from faults than to show striking excellence*, Now 
Aristotle, in the second half of his definition, discountenances 
meanness of style; but his positive hints, in /t/ez. iii. 6, with 
regard to the attainment of dignified expression seem meagre 
and mechanical, and are possibly to some extent ironical. 
He regards style in general as the popular part of rhetoric, 
and consequently treats it cursorily, concluding his account as 
follows: “The most literary style is the epideictic, which is in 
fact meant to be read; next to it comes the forensic. It is 
idle to make the further distinction that style must be attrac- 
tive or elevated. Why should these qualities be attributed to 
it rather than self-control, or nobility, or any other moral ex- 
cellence? The qualities already mentioned will manifestly 
make it attractive, unless our very definition of good style 
is at fault. This is the sole reason why it should be clear 
and not mean but appropriate. It fails in clearness both 
when it is prolix and when it is condensed. The middle 
path is clearly the fittest. And so attractiveness will result 


1 And in the second half it is noteworthy that μὴ ταπεινήν is used: meanness 
is represented as a defect to be avoided, rather than elaboration as an excellence to 
be coveted. The danger of regarding elaboration as a positive virtue is the possible 
encouragement of fie writing—that vice of ‘écrire trop bien’ which, according to 
M. Anatole France, is the worst of all. 

2 Quintil. viii. 2, 24: ‘‘quare non ut intellegere possit, sed ne omnino possit 
non intellegere, curandum.” 

3 Quintil. viii. 3, r: ‘‘venio nunc ad ornatum, in quo sine dubio plus quam in 
ceteris dicendi partibus sibi indulget orator. nam emendate quidem ac lucide dicen- 
tium tenue praemium est, magisque ut vitiis carere quam ut aliquam magnam 
virtutem adeptus esse videaris.” 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 39 


from the elements already mentioned,—a suitable combina- 
tion of the familiar and the unusual, rhythm, and the per- 
suasiveness which is the outcome of propriety.” There are 
several points of great interest in this passage. A hint is 
dropped (with the careless opulence of Aristotle) regarding 
the difference between ordinary oratorical or spoken prose on 
the one hand, and on the other hand literary prose such 
as that of Isocrates and his school of pamphleteers and 
historians. It is interesting, too, to see the doctrine of the 
mean (τὸ μέσον) imported from the ethical domain and applied 
to discourage prolixity and the opposite vice of undue 
condensation. And it is still more interesting to observe at 
the same time that Aristotle does not approve the use, in 
connexion with style, of terms denoting personal qualities 
such as ‘attractiveness’ and ‘elevation.’ Possibly he here 
alludes with disapproval to some early definition or classifica- 
tion of styles which was being mooted by Theophrastus or 
Theodectes?. He points out that the elements of an attractive 
style have already been described. To this it might be 
replied that types of style will vary greatly according to the 
manner in which the various elements are combined ; and 
this Aristotle would no doubt admit, though he might hold 
that on questions of tact positive instruction could only be 
moderately successful’. But on the whole, even in Aristotle, 
and still more in the later critics, the Greek attention to the 

1 Aristot. Rhet. iii. 12, 6: ἡ μὲν οὖν ἐπιδεικτικὴ λέξις γραφικωτάτη" τὸ γὰρ ἔργον 
αὐτῆς ἀνάγνωσις" δευτέρα δὲ ἡ δικανική. τὸ δὲ προσδιαιρεῖσθαι τὴν λέξιν, ὅτι ἡδεῖαν 
δεῖ καὶ μεγαλοπρεπῆ, περίεργον᾽ τί γὰρ μᾶλλον ἢ σώφρονα καὶ ἐλευθέριον καὶ εἴ τις 
ἄλλη ἤθους ἀρετή ; τὸ δὲ ἡδεῖαν εἶναι ποιήσει δῆλον ὅτι τὰ εἰρημένα, εἴπερ ὀρθῶς 
ὥρισται ἣ ἀρετὴ τῆς λέξεως" τίνος γὰρ ἕνεκα δεῖ σαφῆ καὶ μὴ ταπεινὴν εἶναι ἀλλὰ 
πρέπουσαν ; ἄν τε γὰρ ἀδολεσχῇ, οὐ σαφής, οὐδὲ ἂν σύντομος. ἀλλὰ δῆλον ὅτι τὸ 
μέσον ἁρμόττει. καὶ τὸ ἡδεῖαν τὰ εἰρημένα ποιήσει, ἂν εὖ μιχθῇ; τὸ εἰωθὸς καὶ ξενικόν, 
καὶ ὁ ῥυθμός, καὶ τὸ πιθανὸν ἐκ τοῦ πρέποντος. 

> Quintil. iv. 2, 63: ‘‘illa quoque ut narrationi apta ita cum ceteris partibus 
communis est virtus, quam Theodectes huic uni proprie dedit; non enim magnificam 
modo vult esse verum etiam iucundam expositionem.” Cp. 7. ἑρμ. § 114. 

3 Aristot. hed. ili. 7, 8: τὸ δ᾽ εὐκαίρως ἢ μὴ εὐκαίρως χρῆσθαι κοινὸν ἁπάντων 
τών εἰδῶν ἐστίν. And he might have added how difficult it is to teach this tact by 
precept: cp. Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb.c. 12, καιροῦ δὲ οὔτε ῥήτωρ οὐδεὶς οὔτε 
φιλόσοφος εἰς τόδε χρόνου τέχνην ὥρισεν. No matter how many rules may be given, 
much must depend on the individual’s sense of καιρός, τὸ πρέπον, τὸ μέσον. 


40 INTRODUCTION. 


minutiae of expression is conspicuous, especially when con- 
trasted with modern laxity. 

The assiduous care devoted by Greek writers to the 
attainment of beautiful form is attested not only by the 
excellence of their writings themselves, but by the stories 
told in antiquity concerning the industry with which Plato, 
Isocrates, and Demosthenes polished and repolished their 
compositions. A like inference may also be drawn from the 
elaborate exposition of the laws of Greek artistic composition 
offered by the ancient critics, whose analysis, though some- 
times pushed too far, is found on examination to have a 
solid basis of fact. For example, the long list of figures 
(σχήματα) attributed to Demosthenes shows, if it shows 
nothing else, with what various art a great master could 
play upon so perfect an instrument as the Greek language}. 
The same impression is produced by the elaborate rules laid 
down for the structure of the period (περίοδος), with its 
members (κῶλα) and phrases (κόμματα); and by the con- 
siderations which are said to determine the admission or 
avoidance of fzatus (σύγκρουσις φωνηέντων. And it has 
been reserved for the scholarship of our own time to show 
in detail that the measured march of the prose of Demo- 
sthenes is largely due to the fact that as far as possible he 
avoids the occurrence of three or more consecutive short 
syllables, unless these form part of a single word, or of two 
words so closely connected as to be practically one. 

The rhythmical prose of Demosthenes may be regarded 
as hitting the mean between the metrical restrictions of 
poetry and the untrammelled licence of ordinary conversa- 
tion. The Greek theorists saw how sensitive even an ordinary 
audience was to the pleasure of musical sound; Dionysius 
gives some striking illustrations of the fact® They felt, 
therefore, that prose must not forego all the advantage thus 
possessed by poetry, and that, while it was bad art to write 
metrical prose, it was also bad art to write unrhythmical 


1 For the Demosthenic figures, see Blass, Att. Bereds.” iii. pp. 159 ff., and 
Rehdantz-Blass, Demosthenes’ Neun Philippische Reden: Rhetorischer und Stilisti- 
scher Index, passim. 2 D. HO. p. 14. 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 41 


prose. Most Greek prose, it must always be remembered, 
was originally intended for the ear rather than for the eye; 
and in later times, when he could no longer listen to the 
author's voice, the lover of literature employed a skilled 
anagnostes to read to him. 

Modern scholars, distressed by the minute analysis to 
which the Graeco-Roman critics subjected the charms of 
literary style, have exclaimed that we would willingly, if 
we could, “attribute all the minute analysis of sentences in 
Greek orations to the barren subtlety of the rhetors of Roman 
times, and believe that the old orators scorned to compose 
in gyves and fetters, and study the syllables of their periods, 
and the prosody of them, as if they were writing poetry.” 
But, surely, we never feel, to take the case of poetry itself, 
that the genius of Shakespeare was straitened because he 
wrote in verse; nor do we find it easier to believe that the 
mastery (δεινότης) of Demosthenes was the less because it 
embraced at once form and substance, manner and matter. 
Sovereign artists find their best opportunity in the so-called 
restraints of form; they move most freely within the bounds 
of law. It may be, however, that the rhetoricians themselves 
are somewhat to blame for this prejudice; in their zeal to 
unlock the secrets of literary expression they sometimes 
seem to ignore the difference between the methods by which 
the artist composes and the analyst decomposes, between 
the method of life and the method of dissolution, between 
creative fire and cold criticism. They seem sometimes 
almost to suggest that a work of genius might be produced 
by the careful observance of their rules. They forget that 
a great writer passes rapidly and almost unconsciously 
through the stages of instinct, habit, and art. In a sense 
he absorbs all processes, and is modest enough to remember 
that there is withal an element of happy chance in composi- 
tion,—that “skill is in love with luck, and luck with skill ?.” 


1 Mahaffy, Classical Greek Literature, ii. p. 192. 

2 Agathon’s line τέχνη τύχην ἔστερξε καὶ τύχη τέχνην (cp. Fournal of Hellenic 
Studies, xx. 46). Aristotle is fond of quoting from Agathon lines showing the part 
played by τύχη in human action. Cp. π- by. 11. 3. 


42 INTRODUCTION. 


Granted, however, that the Graeco-Roman rhetoricians some- 
times magnify their calling unduly, our debt remains great 
to such a writer as Dionysius for his attempt in the De 
Compositione Verborum to analyse the appeal made to the 
emotions by beautiful words harmoniously arranged. He 
discloses many beauties which would otherwise have been 
lost upon modern readers, and we cannot fail to endorse 
his assertion that care for the minutest details of eloquence 
could not be below the dignity even of a Demosthenes? 
Dionysius himself had, no doubt, a constructive aim in 
his analysis of the great writings of the past. He was a 
believer in zz¢ation (μίμησις), and holds up Demosthenes 
as a model, pointing out that Demosthenes in his turn had 
imitated Thucydides*. No higher standard than the Demo- 
sthenic could have been chosen; and the effect of Dionysius’ 
advocacy on the Greek writing of his own time cannot have 
been other than good. In contemporary Latin literature, 
imitation of Greek and early Roman writers was also much in 
vogue ; and the Greek influence purified Roman taste, though 


1 Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 25: cp. Cic. Orator, 140 ff.—The value of 
the kind of verbal analysis offered by Dionysius might be illustrated by a somewhat 
similar analysis of Virgil’s line texdebantgue manus ripae ulteriorts amore in Mr 
A. C. Bradley’s recent Inaugural Lecture on Poetry for Poetry’s Sake, p.25: ‘But 
I can see this much, that the translation (sc. ‘and were stretching forth their hands 
in longing for the further bank’) conveys a far less vivid picture of the outstretched 
hands and of their remaining outstretched, and a far less poignant sense of the 
shore and the longing of the souls. And it does so partly because this picture and 
this sense are conveyed not only by the obvious meaning of the words, but through 
the long-drawn sound of ‘tendebantque,’ through the time occupied by the five 
syllables and therefore by the idea of ‘ulterioris,’ and through the identity of the 
long sound ‘or’ in the penultimate syllables of ‘ulterioris amore’—all this, and 
much more, apprehended not in this analytical fashion, nor as added to the beauty 
of mere sound and to the obvious meaning, but in unity with them and so as 
expressive of the poetic meaning of the whole.’ Such analysis as this will, in 
many minds, quicken the sense of beauty; and in so doing it will surely justify 
itself, even to those who least like to see the secrets of literary beauty investigated. 
It is in the best sense educative, and so is a similar analysis of other Virgilian lines 
in Mr Courthope’s {276 7x Poetry: Law in Taste, p. 72. Cp. the chapter on the 
“Style of Milton: Metre and Diction” in Mr Walter Raleigh’s essay on AZz/ton. 

2 Dionys. Hal. de Thucyd. c. §3.—The De Llocutione presupposes the habit of 
imitation, but it does not often refer directly to it, though in §§ 112, 113 the practice 
of Herodotus and Thucydides, as imitators, is contrasted. 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 43 


it may have tended to stifle originality and to discourage 
independence. In the so-called ‘classical’ criticism of the 
sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries of our own 
era, it was perhaps from Horace more directly than from 
Dionysius that the idea of zztation was derived. And in 
our own generation R. L. Stevenson, who (with no direct 
knowledge of the Greek critic) has analysed style in a manner 
very similar to that of Dionysius, has left it on record that 
he “played the sedulous ape,’ when training himself to 
write?. The great use of the imitation of masterpieces is that 
it gives a young writer hints in craftsmanship and reveals 
to him hidden beauties in his models; if carried to excess 
and allowed to check spontaneity and impair sincerity, it is 
fatal to all true style. 

The subject of English prose style has been treated in 
recent years not only by R. L. Stevenson, but by writers as 
various as Walter Pater (Appreciations, pp. 1—36), Walter 
Raleigh (γνώ), Herbert Spencer (Philosophy of Style), 
J. Earle (English Prose, pp. 334-368), G. Saintsbury 
(Specimens of English Prose Style, pp. xv.—xlv.), and J. A. 
Symonds (Essays Speculative and Suggestive, i. pp. 256—331 
and ii. I—29)*. 

A glance at these English books on style, and still more 
at French manuals of composition such as that of Géruzez 
or German treatises like Gerber’s Die Sprache als Kunst, 
will show how much of the old classification and terminology 
still remains,—‘figures of thought, ‘figures of speech,’ ‘period,’ 
and the like. Some ancient excesses, such as the applica- 
tion of the term figures of speech to words like ‘iamiam’ and 


1 For Stevenson’s own description of his early habits of imitation, reference may 
be made to Graham Balfour's Zzfe of Robert Louis Stevenson, vol. 1. p. 200. 
Stevenson’s essay on Some Technical Elements of Style in Literature will be found 
in his Miscellanies, iii. pp. 236—261 (Edinburgh edition): “‘it is a singularly sug- 
gestive inquiry into a subject which has always been considered too vague and 
difficult for analysis, at any rate since the days of the classical writers on rhetoric, 
whom Stevenson had never read” (2776, ii. p. 11). 

2 To this list may be added the introductory notices in the five volumes of 
Craik’s English Prose Selections. 

3 Period, colon, and comma with a change of meaning now do duty for terms of 
punctuation. 


> 


44 INTRODUCTION. 


‘liberum, have—it is to be hoped—disappeared, leaving 
only what has been proved by experience to be of per- 
manent utility. Thus restrained, the ancient doctrine of 
tropes and figures remains the basis of the modern. And 
the four Demetrian types of style seem to be regarded as a 
useful division for modern purposes, since in English poetry 
the elevated style can be freely illustrated from Milton, the 
graceful from Tennyson, the forcible from Shakespeare, the 
simple from Wordsworth?, But though much of the ancient 
doctrine survives, there are (in almost every country except 
the United States of America) some signs of failing interest 
in the subject generally. In France, the country of great 
prose, rhetoric and style have always been carefully studied, 
thanks largely to the long tradition which linked the schools 
of Lyons and Bordeaux with the teaching of Quintilian*, 
And yet, even in France, the study is said to be declining ; 
and so rhetoric, which in ancient times was widely cultivated 


1 Wilhelm Scherer (Poetik, p. 50): ‘‘Die (antike) Rhetorik hat ferner fiir die 
Lehre vom Ausdruck die Classification der Tropen und Figuren so reich ausgebildet, 
dass die ganze Folgezeit nichts hinzuftigte.’’—For ‘iamiam’ and ‘liberum’ as figures 
of speech, cp. Quintil. ix. 1, 16; and for ‘dead figures of speech,’ see J. P. Postgate’s 
Preface, p. xxx. to Mrs Cust’s translation of Bréal’s Essai de Sémantique. 

2 Cp. Abbott and Seeley’s Zuglish Lessons for English People, pp. 69—86, 
where these divisions are adopted and illustrations given from the poets mentioned 
above.—It might be interesting to ask what estimate an ancient Greek critic would 
have formed of such lines as Browning’s in Pippa Passes :— 

God’s in his heaven— 
All’s right with the world! 
He would probably have decided that they lacked μεγαλοπρέπεια (cp. π. ἑρμ. ὃ 5), 
for an example of which he might point to Sophocles’ rendering of the same 
idea :— " 
θάρσει μοι, θάρσει, τέκνον᾽ ἔτι μέγας οὐρανῷ 
Ζεύς, ὃς ἐφορᾷ πάντα καὶ κρατύνει. (Soph. ZZ. 174.) 


Browning’s lines he would presumably refer to the χαρακτὴρ ἰσχνός and praise them 
if he regarded them as dramatically or otherwise appropriate (cp. Cassio’s “‘ Well: 
God’s above all,” Othello, ii. 3). The author of the περὶ ᾿Ἑρμηνείας at all events, 
with his liking for familiar proverbs, would look with favour on a literary style 
that was in close touch with the spoken language. 

3 Quintilian was of Spanish origin. His name, like that of the Gaul Marcus 
Aper in the Dialogus de Oratoribus, suggests the start which the Latin races, as 
compared with the Teutonic, were to have in the field of rhetoric or literary 
criticism. 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 45 


and in the middle ages was one of the subjects of the ¢r7viam, 
is being threatened in her great modern stronghold. All 
the more reason that other countries, if they hold the view 
that to write one’s own language correctly and beautifully 
is no small part of a true patriotism, should be ready to 
learn from the lessons of the past}. 

One of these lessons is the perennial nature of the anti- 
thesis, Aszanism and Atticism, a reference to which may fitly 
conclude this part of the Introduction. ‘Asianism’ and 
‘Atticism’ are, it must be admitted, difficult expressions to 
define exactly*. But certain passages of Cicero, Dionysius, 
and Quintilian, sufficiently indicate the historical origin of 
the term Aszanzsm, and the general tendencies which it and 
Atticism embodied in the opinion of critics well qualified 
to judge. In the 4rutus, Cicero describes eloquence (at the 
end of the Attic period) as setting sail from the Piraeus, and 
then passing through the islands of the A*gean and traversing 
the whole of Asia, sullying herself on the way with foreign 
fashions, losing her sound and wholesome Attic style, and 
almost unlearning her native language*. In the same way 
Dionysius dates the decline of the ‘ancient and philosophic 
rhetoric’ from the death of Alexander of Macedon, and 
vividly depicts the scandalous ways of the meretricious 
rhetoric which had usurped its place* Quintilian, again, 


1 Gerald of Wales, writing at the beginning of the thirteenth century and 
lamenting the low ebb to which letters had sunk in England, seems (as far as can 
be judged from his fragmentary text and from subsequent references to his views) 
to have laid stress on the importance of ‘‘recte lepide ornate loqui,” and to have 
recommended training ‘“‘non solum in trivio, verum etiam in authoribus et philo- 
sophis”’ (Brewer, Givaldi Cambrenszs Opera, iv. pp. 7, 8). 

2 The difficulty is noticed by Wilamowitz-Moellendorff in his paper on Astazis- 
mus und Atticismus (Hermes, xxxv. 1 ff.). The recent literature of the subject is 
reviewed by Ammon in Bursian’s Fahresbericht tiber die Fortschritte der classtschen 
Altertumswissenschaft, xxviii. 2, pp. 206—211. 

3 Οἷς. Brut. 51: ‘‘nam semel e Piraeo eloquentia evecta est, omnes peragravit 
insulas atque ita peregrinata tota Asia est, ut se externis oblineret moribus 
omnemque illam salubritatem Atticae dictionis et quasi sanitatem perderet ac 
loqui paene dedisceret.” 

4 Dionys. Hal. de Antig. Orat.c. τ: cp. D. H. pp. 43, 44.—The controversy 
is not mentioned in the 7. ἑρμ.. which however seeks its models in the best Attic 
writers. 


46 INTRODUCTION. 


remarks that Asiatic oratory lacked judgment and restraint ; 
that, whereas Attic taste and refinement could not endure 
an idle redundancy, the Asiatics carried their innate vanity 
and bombast into the domain of eloquence’. 

Atticism may, therefore, be regarded, from the standpoint 
of the Graeco-Roman critics, as a reversion to the classical 
models, and Asianism as a literary degeneracy showing itself 
chiefly, but not entirely, in the use of excessive ornament. 
It was, above all, in the want of the Attic sense of measure 
and fitness that Asianism declared itself. Among the Attic 
writers we find examples of the stately as well as of the 
plain style; among the Asiatic writers, emulators of the 
plain style as well as of the stately. But among the latter 
the Attic taste is wanting ; and this makes all the difference*. 
They made no attempt to preserve that taste through constant 
contact with the Attic masterpieces, or through the study of 
rhetoric as an art rather than as simple declamation. 

In Latin literature of almost every period Asianism had 
its advocates and representatives. This is also true of 
Atticism, which readily commended itself to the severity of 
taste so characteristic of the Roman character. It is, indeed, 
to the ruling classes of Rome that Dionysius ascribes the 


1 Quintil. Zzs¢. Or. viii. prooem. 17: “‘his (sc. Asianis) iudicium in eloquendo 
ac modus (defuit)”; zé¢d. xii. 10,17: “‘quod Attici limati quidam et emuncti nihil 
inane aut redundans ferebant, Asiana gens tumidior alioqui atque iactantior vaniore 
etiam dicendi gloria inflata est.” 

2 Quintil. xii. 10, 20 has well marked the essential unity underlying the 
individual differences of the Attic writers: ‘‘nemo igitur dubitaverit, longe esse 
optimum genus Atticorum. in quo ut est aliquid inter ipsos commune, id est 
judicium acre tersumque: ita ingeniorum plurimae formae. quapropter mihi falli 
multum videntur, qui solos esse Atticos credunt tenues et lucidos et significantes et 
quadam eloquentiae frugalitate contentos ac semper manum intra pallium conti- 
nentes. nam quis erit hic Atticus? sit Lysias; hunc enim amplectuntur amatores 
istius nominis modum.”—After mentioning in this way Isocrates, Antiphon, Isaeus 
and others, Quintilian proceeds: ‘‘quid denique Demosthenes? non cunctos illos 
tenues et circumspectos vi, sublimitate, impetu, cultu, compositione superavit? non 
insurgit locis? non figuris gaudet? non translationibus nitet? non oratione ficta dat 
tacentibus vocem? non illud iusiurandum per caesos in Marathone ac Salamine 
propugnatores rei publicae satis manifesto docet, praeceptorem eius Platonem 
fuisse? quem ipsum num Asianum appellamus plerumque instinctis divino spiritu Ὁ 
vatibus comparandum ?” 


SUMMARY AND ASPECTS. 47 


triumph which Atticism seemed to have won in his own 
day’. Cicero, whether through the influence of his Rhodian 
training or through his own instinctive perception of oratorical 
effect, was no extreme adherent of the Attic school. He 
cannot have failed, though he nowhere expressly assigns this 
reason, to recognise that the style of such a writer as Lysias 
would be out of harmony with the genius of Latin, a language 
in which (owing to its comparatively limited resources) sim- 
plicity is apt to end in baldness. It was rather in the rich 
periods of Isocrates that Cicero found his model for that 
Latin rhetoric which writers of modern Europe have so often 
imitated; and it is therefore not easy to exaggerate the 
influence of this Attic orator upon the development of artistic 
prose. And if this be true of Isocrates, it applies to his 
master Gorgias. There is, in truth, something strangely 
fascinating in the lasting and prolific energy of these two 
indomitable old men. 

As was pointed out earlier in this introduction, Gorgias 
may well be considered the founder of artistic prose. It is 
true that his love of the figures, and of other ornaments of 
style, sometimes led him into extravagance and fine writing, 
and caused his name to be coupled in antiquity with that 
of Hegesias, the supposed founder of Asianism®. Neverthe- 
less it was a great achievement to establish the doctrine that 
prose no less than poetry should be artistic. Only at 
a comparatively recent stage of modern literary criticism 
was it recognised that the Πα and the Odyssey are 
not ‘natural’ poetry but artificial in the highest degree. 
Gorgias no doubt saw this, as did Dionysius at a later 
time; and he would have perceived no less clearly that 
the simplicity of such prose as that of Lysias was not natural 
but the result of art—was, in fact, a studied simplicity. 

Personally Gorgias is an excellent type of that daring 
and exuberant vigour which languages no less than nations 
need if they are perpetually to renew their youth. He lived 
to a ripe old age, attributing (it is said) his longevity to the 


1 D. H. pp. 34» 38: 
2 See m. ty. iii. 2. 


48 INTRODUCTION. 


fact that he had never given the rein to the lower pleasures !. 
In his style he would seem to have remained always youthful, 
and thus to have incurred the reproach which later critics 
intended to convey by the terms μειρακιεύεσθαι and νεανι- 
eveo Cat. 

His pupil Isocrates, on the other hand, illustrates the 
usual rule that with added years there comes a more subdued 
beauty of style% Two great admirers of Isocrates in later 
days, a Roman master of style and a Greek critic, have 
recognised to the full the part played in the formation of 
style by the ardour of youth. Lz the young orator I would 
welcome a luxuriant opulence, says Cicero, when describing 
the early efforts of Sulpicius?, Every youthful heart 


1 Cp. T. G. Tucker (Classtcal Review, xiv. 247) on a ‘Saying of Gorgias,’ where 
the reference is to Plutarch de Glor. Athen. 5. 

2 Οἷς. Or. 176: ‘‘Gorgias autem avidior est generis eius et his festivitatibus— 
sic enim ipse censet—insolentius abutitur; quas Isocrates, cum tamen audivisset in 
Thessalia adulescens senem iam Gorgiam, moderatius etiam temperavit; quin 
etiam se ipse tantum, quantum aetate procedebat—prope enim centum confecit 
annos—relaxarat a nimia necessitate numerorum; quod declarat in eo libro, quem 
ad Philippum Macedonem scripsit, cum iam admodum esset senex; in quo dicit 
sese minus iam servire numeris quam solitus esset.” The reference here is to Isocr. 
Phil. 27, οὐδὲ yap ταῖς περὶ τὴν λέξιν εὐρυθμίαις καὶ ποικιλίαις κεκοσμήκαμεν αὐτόν, als 
αὐτός τε νεώτερος ὧν ἐχρώμην καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ὑπέδειξα, δι ὧν τοὺς λόγους ἡδίους ἂν 
ἅμα καὶ πιστοτέρους ποιοῖεν. ὧν οὐδὲν ἔτι δύναμαι διὰ τὴν ἡλικίαν. These words 
would be written when Isocrates was go. In his Panathenaicus (aet. 98) he writes: 
νεώτερος μὲν ὠν...περὶ ἐκείνους (τοὺς λόγους) ἐπραγματευόμην τοὺς περὶ τῶν συμφερόν- 
των τῇ τε πόλει καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις “Ελλησι συμβουλεύοντας, καὶ πολλῶν μὲν ἐνθυμημάτων 
γέμοντας, οὐκ ὀλίγων δ᾽ ἀντιθέσεων καὶ παρισώσεων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἰδεῶν τῶν ἐν ταῖς 
ῥητόρείαις διαλαμπουσῶν καὶ τοὺς ἀκούοντας ἐπισημαίνεσθαι καὶ θορυβεῖν ἀναγκαζου- 
σῶν (Isocr. Panath. 1,2). The ‘old man eloquent,’ therefore, like Milton himself, 
cultivated greater austerity in his later years (for Milton in this regard, cp. Seeley 
Lectures and Essays p. 144). Milton threw off, in particular, that ‘troublesome 
and modern bondage of riming,’ the connexion of which with the ‘figure’ ὁμοιοτέ- 
λευτον has been so well traced in Norden’s Azstprosa (ii. 810 ff.). 

3 Cic. de Orat. ii. 21, 88 (Antonius loquitur), ‘atque ut a familiari nostro ex- 
ordiar, hunc ego, Catule, Sulpicium primum in causa parvula adulescentulum 
audivi, voce et forma et motu corporis et reliquis rebus aptis ad hoc munus, de quo 
quaerimus, oratione autem celeri et concitata, quod erat ingenii, et verbis efferves- 
centibus et paulo nimium redundantibus, quod erat aetatis. Non sum aspernatus ; 
volo enim se efferat in adulescente fecunditas; nam sicut facilius in vitibus revo- 
cantur ea, quae sese nimium profuderunt, quam, si nihil valet materies, nova 
sarmenta cultura excitantur, item volo esse in adulescente, unde aliquid amputem ; 
non enim potest in eo esse sucus diuturnus, quod nimis celeriter est maturitatem 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 49 


passionately pursues beauty of style, says Dionysius, when he 
offers his Arrangement of Words to the young Melitius Rufus 
as a birthday gift. Yet no two writers have shown more 
plainly, in their rhetorical teaching, how great is the need of 
discipline, if style is to be not only ardent, but simple, strong, 
and beautifully clear. 


C. DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF THE DE ELOCUTIONE. 


For more than one reason it has seemed best to give 
some account of the subject-matter of the De EJocutione, 
and of other similar treatises on prose style, before discussing 
the difficult question of its date and authorship. Where 
possible, it is as well not to start with that note of scepticism 
which is so characteristic of modern scholarship, but rather 
first of all to suggest, independently of disputed points, the 
literary value and permanent interest of the work in question. 
The course here taken has this further advantage that the 
internal evidence with regard to the date and authorship of 
the De Elocutione can now be considered in the light of the 
historical sketch already given. And in this, as in so many 
similar cases, it is the internal evidence that requires the 
most detailed treatment. 


I. INTERNAL EVIDENCE. 


Reserving for the present the discussion of the external 
evidence, which is of a precarious kind, we may ask what 
opinion we could have formed, on purely internal grounds, 
as to the date of the treatise, if it had come down to us 


adsecutum.’ Cp. Brut. οἱ, 316, ‘quibus non contentus Rhodum veni meque ad 
eundem, quem Romae audiveram, Molonem applicavi cum actorem in veris causis 
scriptoremque praestantem, tum in notandis animadvertendisque vitiis et instituendo 
docendoque prudentissimum. is dedit operam—si modo id consequi potuit—, ut 
nimis redundantes nos et superfluentes iuvenili quadam dicendi impunitate et licentia 
reprimeret et quasi extra ripas diffluentes coerceret.’ The words of Dionysius are 
ἐπτόηται yap ἅπασα νέου ψυχὴ περὶ τὸν τῆς ἑρμηνείας ὡραϊσμόν (de Comp. Verb. 
ἘΞ τὴ: 


R. 4 


50 INTRODUCTION. 


without any external evidence bearing upon the point. To 
what century, and to what group of writers on style, should 
we have been inclined to assign it? The following table, 
which includes the principal writers mentioned earlier in this 
introduction, will show the character of the problem, though 
it may be very far from suggesting a definite solution of it. 
The names are of course arranged, and assigned to centuries, 
in a rough and approximate order only. 


CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF GREEK AND ROMAN 
EXPONENTS OF STYLE. 


Empedocles. Corax. Tisias. Gorgias. Protagoras. 
500—400 B.C. Prodicus. Hippias. Theodorus. Thrasymachus. 
Antiphon. 


Lysias. Isocrates. Demosthenes. Plato. Aristotle. 


AIO 90. Ἐ:Ὸ: Theophrastus. Demetrius Phalereus. 


300—200 B.C. [Alexandria.] [Hegesias.] 


200—1I00 B.C. [Pergamus.] Hermagoras. 


Cornificius. Cicero. Horace. Dionysius of Halicar- 


USD BEA dai nassus. Caecilius of Calacte. 


‘Longinus’ (third century, according to the traditional 


Peco Ae. view). Tacitus (Dialogus de Oratoribus). Quintilian. 


TOO—200 A.D. Hermogenes. 


(1) Sources of the Treatise, and its Prosopographia. 
Whoever the author may have been, it is clear that he 
follows, to a great extent, the teaching of the Peripatetic 
school. As will be shown in the course of the Notes, refer- 
ences are made to Aristotle throughout the treatise’. At 
first sight, indeed, the De Elocutione might seem to be simply 


1 See §$ 11, 28, 29, 34, 38, 41, 81, 97, 116, 154, £57, 164, 225, 230, 233, 234. 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 51 


a more comprehensive treatment of the subject of style on 
the lines laid down in the Third Book of the Rhetoric. The 
Peripatetics as a class are mentioned in ὃ 181. Aristotle’s 
immediate successor Theophrastus is quoted in § 41, 114, 
173, 222, 250, and is probably followed in many other places. 
The numerous references made to Aristotle in the course of 
one brief treatise seem the more noteworthy in contrast with 
the practice of other rhetoricians, such as Dionysius of Hali- 
carnassus, who are inclined to dispute or ignore the authority 
of the philosophers and their followers. It is, accordingly, 
not surprising that Petrus Victorius who had studied both 
the Rhetoric and the De Elocutione so carefully should have 
upheld the tradition which ascribes it to Demetrius Phalereus. 
This is the view also adopted (probably from Victorius) by 
Milton when, towards the end of his 7vactate of Education, he 
refers to “a graceful and ornate rhetoric, taught out of the rule 
of Plato, Aristotle, Phalereus, Cicero, Hermogenes, Longinus.’ 

But though many important details are borrowed from 
Aristotle, the scheme of the book as a whole clearly implies 
the currency of a doctrine later than his. The treatise opens 
with an introductory account of the periodic structure of 
sentences; but its real subject is, as already indicated, the 
four types of style. Now this classification cannot be due to 
Aristotle, since in his extant works we find no more than the 
germs of such a division of style; and it is unlikely that 
Theophrastus recognised four types. Yet the fourfold divi- 
sion does not appear to have originated with the author of 
the De Elocutione (§ 36), though he claims to have treated a 
neglected aspect of one of the types (§ 179). It is even 
stated (§ 36) that some authorities recognised only two types, 
the plain and the elevated. A natural, though not an abso- 
lutely necessary, inference from all this is that the writer 
lived at a time, considerably later than that of Aristotle, 
when the doctrine of the types of style had undergone many 


| D. H. pp. 40, 41.—It will be remembered that the practical rhetoric of the 
Isocratic school was revived, at Rome, by Dionysius, who had for collaborator the 
Sicilian Caecilius. Though he more than once acknowledges his own obligations 
to Theophrastus, Dionysius rebukes (22. ad Amm. 7.) the pretensions of certain 
Peripatetics of his day. 


4—2 


52 INTRODUCTION. 


developments and modifications. The special point in which 
the De Elocutione differs from all other similar extant treatises 
is its recognition of δεινότης as a separate type of style’. 

After this brief mention of Aristotle and Theophrastus 
as sources from whom parts, and parts only, of the De 
Elocutione are drawn, we may proceed to review any further 
personal names, occurring in the course of the treatise, which 
seem to bear on the question of date and authorship. The 
most important name from this point of view is that of 
Demetrius Phalereus himself, which is actually found in the 
treatise. In § 289 we read: “Often in addressing a despot, 
or any person otherwise ungovernable, we may be driven 
to employ a figure of language if we wish to censure him. 
Demetrius of Phalerum dealt in this way with the Macedonian 
Craterus, who was seated aloft on a golden couch, wearing a 
purple mantle, and receiving the Greek embassies with haughty 
pride. Making use of a figure, he said tauntingly: ‘We 
ourselves once received these men as ambassadors together 
with yon Craterus.’” The existence of this section naturally 
raised doubts as to the authorship in the minds of the scholars 
of the Renaissance; and the De Elocutione thus passed, much 
earlier than the De Sublimitate, into that position of dispute 
and uncertainty which has been the lot of so many Greek 
rhetorical treatises. Victorius, however, saw in the section 
a proof of his own view with respect to the authorship. It 
is only natural, he remarks, that Demetrius Phalereus should 
desire to keep alive the memory of a deed which did him 
so much honour?. Later believers in the Demetrian author- 
ship have thought it safer to assume, on slender grounds, that 
the passage in question is a late addition®. 


1 Two circumstances make it specially difficult to infer date of authorship from the 
subject-matter of rhetorical treatises: (1) the dearth of extant documents in the 
period between Aristotle and Cicero; (2) the habit of unacknowledged compilation. 

2 Petri Victorit Commentarii in librum Demetrii Phaleret de Elocutione (Flor., 
1594) Pp: 252: “‘..... qui factum id suum honestum perire noluerit, ideoque moni- 
mentis litterarum prodiderit, quod exemplo multorum facere potuerit, praesertim 
cum mirifice conveniat huic loco.” 

3 H. Liers, De Aetate et Scriptore libri qui fertur Demetrii Phaleret περὶ 


Ἑρμηνείας, p. 34- 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 53 


No literary reference throughout the De Elocutione is so 
damaging to the traditional view as this. But the mention 
of other names, or the manner of their mention, may also 
be held to suggest a later time. No inference can perhaps 
be drawn, one way or the other, from the nature of the 
allusions to the orators Demosthenes and Demades. The 
supremacy of Demosthenes is, it is true, not acknowledged 
quite so explicitly in this as in other writings of its class; 
but the possession of a high reputation is implied in the large 
number of illustrations drawn from his speeches. Demades 
was an orator of some mark, but the relatively small number 
of quotations (§§ 282 ff.) from him shows that he is not con- 
sidered to stand on anything like the same level as Demo- 
sthenes. 

A more definite indication of late authorship may be 
sought in the references (§§ 153, 193, 194) to Menander and 
Philemon. Menander and Philemon were contemporaries 
of Demetrius Phalereus; but it seems to be the judgment 
of posterity that is conveyed in § 193: “This is the reason 
why, while Philemon is only read, Menander (whose style is 
for the most part broken) holds the boards.’ The later 
standpoint seems also implied in the allusion (ὃ 204) to ἡ νέα 
kopwdiat. It is hardly likely, either, that Demetrius Phalereus 
would have spoken collectively of of Περιπατητικοί (§ 181) as 
possessing common characteristics of style, or would have 
quoted from Aristotle and Theophrastus as from authorities 
widely recognised in the rhetorical schools. The Greek 
classics seem, in the De Elocutione, to be designated as οἱ 
ἀρχαῖοι (δ 67, 244), as distinguished from the rhetoricians, 
styles, and movements of the author’s own time, which are 
represented by such expressions as of νῦν ῥήτορες (§ 287), ἡ viv 
κατέχουσα δεινότης (8 245),, ὡς νῦν ὀνομάζομεν (§ 237). 

In connexion with these indications of a later period may 
be mentioned a non-literary reference which would seem to 
point to Roman times. The section in question runs as 
follows: “In general it may be said that the epiphoneme 
bears a likeness to the decorations in wealthy homes,— 


1 These and other doubtful points will be more fully discussed in the Notes. 


54 INTRODUCTION. 


cornices, triglyphs, and dvoad purples. Indeed, it is in itself 
a mark of verbal opulence” (§ 108). If by πορφύραις πλατείαις 
in this passage is meant the laticlave of the Roman senator, 
then clearly the De Elocutzone cannot be from the hand of 
Demetrius Phalereus. But unfortunately the expression is 
not altogether free from ambiguity’. The same uncertainty 
attends the reference to the man of Gadara in ὃ 237. If the 
rhetorician Theodorus of Gadara is really meant, then we 
have a reference to the time not only of Rome but of 
Augustan Rome?. 

The De Elocutione contains references to many other 
authors,—poets as well as prose-writers. But these references 
yield no definite evidence with regard to the date of the 
treatise. There is, however, some reason to think that 
Artemon (§ 223) and Archedemus (§ 34) were comparatively 
late authors, and their date is accordingly discussed in the 
Notes, to which reference may also be made for similar 
discussions concerning other writers’. 

As the references made in the De Elocutione to previous 
authors are so numerous, it might perhaps be thought to be 
a safe inference that a writer who, like Dionysius of Hali- 
carnassus, is not mentioned was not known. But this does 
not by any means follow, especially if the author of the De 
Elocutione was contemporary with, or only slightly later than, 
Dionysius. In his rhetorical writings, extensive and miscel- 
laneous as they are, Dionysius himself only once mentions 
his contemporary and fellow-worker Caecilius of Calacte. 
Nor ought we too readily to assume that two such authors 
as Dionysius and the writer of the De Elocutione would 
necessarily know of each other's work. It is forgotten how 
small the circulation of books in antiquity may have been, 
owing to the expense and labour of reproduction; and how 
many, various, and far removed (in time and place) from one 
another were the rhetorical schools. For these and other 


1 See note on § 108. 2 See note on ὃ 237. P 1741 has T'adnpevs. 
3 Sotades (§ 189), Dicaearchus (§ 182), Sophron (§ 126), Ctestas (δ 212), 
Philistus (§ 198), Clectarchus (§ 304), Praxiphanes (§ 57), and the painter (Viczas 


(§ 76). 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 55 


reasons we shall look with distrust on that class of argument 
which would maintain that the De E/ocutione must of neces- 
sity have come later than the works of Dionysius of Hali- 
carnassus because the latter recognise only three, the former 
four types of style. 


(2) Language of the Treatise: Vocabulary, Gram- 
mar, etc. Leaving the sources and the personal names of 
the De Elocutione, we may proceed to investigate its language, 
—terminology and vocabulary generally, accidence and syntax. 

The very title-word ἑρμηνεία seems itself to imply a con- 
siderably later date than that of Aristotle and Theophrastus, 
with both of whom (as it has already been pointed out) the 
accepted term for ‘style’ is λέξις, while with Aristotle ἑρμηνεία 
is a logical or grammatical rather than a literary term. In 
the same way, a technical term so elaborate as ξηροκακοζηλία 
(§ 239), meaning ‘affectation in thought and aridity in com- 
position, must surely belong to an advanced stage in the 
study of style. The term was, the writer tells us, in his own 
day a recent invention, like the simpler compound κακόξηλος: 
and certainly no such compound presents itself in classical 
times. Another rhetorical term which is specified as recent 
is λόγιος, used as equivalent to μεγαλοπρεπής". The phrase 
ἡ νῦν κατέχουσα δεινότης (§ 245) has already [p. 53 supra] been 
incidentally mentioned, and attention has been called [p. 52] 
to the recognition of δεινότης as a separate type of style. 

Full details concerning the rhetorical, grammatical, and 
metrical terms found in the De E/locutione are given in the 
Notes and Glossary ; and as far as possible, some indication 
is added as to the earliest known occurrence of comparatively 
late words. Scholars have sometimes attempted to ground 
an argument as to date upon the fact that certain expressions 
are missing from this rhetorical terminology, the chief of 
which perhaps is τρόπος in the sense of ‘trope. They have 
urged that, inasmuch as Cicero (Sruz. xvii. 6) employs the 
term and as it probably was in use considerably before his 
time, the De Héocutione must have been written at a com- 


1 § 38 ἄρξομαι δ᾽ ἀπὸ τοῦ μεγαλοπρεποῦς, ὅνπερ νῦν λόγιον ὀνομάζουσιν. 


56 INTRODUCTION. 


paratively early date. But apart from the possibility that 
the word is employed in this sense in § 120, no trustworthy 
argument can be founded on omissions of this kind. It is 
unsafe to infer ignorance from silence. 

On the other hand, the late words or forms occurring in 
the De Elocutione are very numerous. The following belong 
to the post-classical age, none of them being found (in extant 
documents) earlier than Alexandrian, and some not earlier 
than Graeco-Roman times :— 


ἀνθυπαλλαγή (ὃ 60) 
ἀνθυπαλλάσσειν (§ 59) 
ἀνυπόκριτος (δ 194) 
ἁπλοῖκός (§ 244) 
ἀποτομία (ὃ 292) 
ἀποφθεγματικός (ὃ 9) 
ἀρκτικός (§ 56) 
ἀσημείωτος (ὃ 202) 
ἀστεῖσμός (δὲ 128, 130) 
ἀσφαλίζεσθαι (δὲ 85, 193) 
αὐλητρία (ὃ 240) 
γνωμολογικός (δ 9) 
διαμόρφωσις (8 195) 
διασπασμός (ὃ 68) 
διήγημα (δὲ 8, 137, etc.) 
δυσήκοος (ὃ 48) 
δυσκατόρθωτος (ὃ 127) 
δύσρητος (§ 302) 
δύσφθογγος (ὃ 246) 
δυσφωνία (§§ 48, 105) 
δύσφωνος (δὲ 69, 70, 105) 
ἐμφατικός (ὃ 51) 
ἐναφανίζειν (§ 30) 
ἐξαιρέτως (ὃ 125) 
ἐξαπλοῦν (§ 254) 
εὐήκοος (δὲ 48, 258, 301) 
θαυμασμός (ὃ 291) 


κακοφωνία (S§ 219, 255) 
καταληκτικός (δὲ 38, 39) 
κατασμικρύνειν (δὲ 44, 123) 
κατερᾶν (ὃ 302) 
κινδυνώδης (δὲ 80, 85, 127) 
κυκλοειδής (δ 11) 
λεκανίς (§ 302) 
λιθοβολεῖν (ὃ 115) 
μεταμορφοῦν (ὃ 189) 
μονοσύχλαβος (ὃ 7) 
ὁλοκληρία (ὃ 3) 
ὀνειδιστικῶς (ὃ 280) 
παραπληρωματικός (§ 55) 
προκαταρκτικός (δὰ 38, 39) 
ῥυθμοειδής (§ 221) 
σμικρύνειν (δ 236) 
σπειρᾶν (ὃ 8) 
συγκάλυμμα (ὃ 100) 
συγκαταλήγειν (ὃ 2) 
συμπεραιοῦν (ὃ 2) 
συναλοιφή (§ 70) 
συναφεῖα (δὰ 63, 182) 
τουτέστιν OF TOUT ἔστι 
(δ 271, 204, 301) 
ὑποδάκνειν (ὃ 260) 
ὑποκατασκευάζειν (§ 224) 


φιλοφρόνησις (δὰ 231, 232) 


Similarly the treatise contains a number of words found 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 57 


in classical times but here used in a post-classical sense, — 
in a meaning not found before the Graeco-Roman or at all 
events the Alexandrian age :— 


ἀπαγγελία (ὃ 114) ἠχώδης (S§ 42, 68) 

αὐτόθεν (ὃ 122) λογικός (δ 1, 42, 117) 
βάσανος (ὃ 201) λοιπόν (ὃ 240) 

διαπαίξζειν (§ 147) παρέλκειν (δ 58) 
δοκιμάζειν (§ 200) περιαγωγή (δὲ 19, 45, etc.) 
ἐκτίθεσθαι (δὲ 35, 200) πρόσωπον (δὲ 130, 134, etc.) 
ἐπιφέρειν (δὴ 34, 51, etc.) σημειώδης (ὃ 208) 
ἑρμηνεύειν (δὴ 46, 120, 121) ὑπερπίπτειν (ὃ 42) 


On the other hand, a good many words or forms occur 
which are specially Attic :— 


ἄγροικος (δὲ 167, 217) κωμῳδεῖν (§ 150) 
ἀτεχνῶς (§§ I, 5, etc.) κωμῳδοποιός (ὃ 126) 
ἀστεΐζεσθαι (§ 149) ναυτιᾶν (§ 15) 
αὐτοσχεδιάζειν (§ 224) σμικρός (ὃ 237) 
ἑτερόφθαλμος (ὃ 293) τερθρεία (§ 27) 
κινδυνεύειν (ὃ 40) ψίαθος (§ 302) 


κομψεία (δ 36) 

These Attic forms are of course consistent with either 
classical or post-classical date,—with either Attic or Atticist 
authorship. But the latter alternative is decisively recom- 
mended by the simultaneous occurrence of so many words 
and forms which are admittedly post-classical. The Atticism 
is but the veneer. 

It is worth notice that a considerable number of words 
or forms occurring in the De Elocutione are ἅπαξ εἰρημένα. The 
following list is, probably, fairly complete :— 


ἀδολεσχότερος (ὃ 212) μετροειδής (δὲ 181, 182) 
ἀρχαιοειδής (ὃ 245) ξηροκακοζηλία (ὃ 230) 
ἀτακτοτέρως (ὃ 53) παράξυσμα (δ 55) 
δυνάστις (§ 292) περισσοτεχνία (δ 247) 
δύσφθογγος (ὃ 246) πολυηχία (§ 73) 
ἐπιπληθύεσθαι (δ 156) προαναβοᾶν (ὃ 15) 
εὐκαταστρόφως (§ 10) πρόσφυμα (ὃ 55) 


μετασυντιθέναι (δὲ ΤΙ, 59, εἴς.) συνειρμός (ὃ 180) 


58 INTRODUCTION. 


Most of these words are probably late. But the very 
existence of words found only in the De Elocutione suggests 
caution in the use of the linguistic criterion. We are bound 
constantly to bear in mind the fact that we have but the 
scanty remains of a vast literature. 

The extent to which the treatise, as it has come down 
to us, uses both older and later forms of the language is seen 
in its employment, at one and the same time, of oo and rr. 
In close conjunction we find ἀνθυπαλλάσσοντα and διαταττο- 
μένῳ (ὃ 59), ἐφυλάττετο and συμπλήσσειν (δ 68). The Ionic 
form oo was used by the older Attic writers such as Thucy- 
dides ; tr prevails in Attic inscriptions, as also in Xenophon, 
the Attic orators, Plato, Aristotle; oo is favoured by the 
κοινή, tr by the Atticists. If we are to accept the best 
manuscript testimony, the author of the De Elocutione used 
both forms’. The point is a small one in itself, but it illus- 
trates forcibly the mixed character of the language of the 
De Elocutione. 

We pass next to the grammar of the treatise. Here 
the chief point for remark is that the dual is repeatedly 
found, eg. ὥσπερ ἀνθέστατον καὶ ἀντίκεισθον ἐναντιωτάτω 
§ 36, ἐκ δυοῖν χαρακτήροιν τούτοιν ὃ 235, μετὰ δυοῖν τούτοιν 
§ 287. The first of these examples is the most striking, 
because it was in its verbal forms, and in the nominative and 
accusative cases of its nominal forms, that the dual began its 
decline. It would be hard to match this emphatic collocation 
of dual forms in any Greek author from the time of Aristotle 
to that of the Atticists2» The dual number, it is well known, 
had practically disappeared from Greek literature when it 
was revived by the Atticists, who were however unable to 
secure for it more than a brief existence. The neglect of the 
dual, shown in Biblical Greek and in later Greek generally, 
is shared by Modern Greek. 

Traces of the κοινή, on the other hand, are found in the 


1 In the same way both σμικρός and μικρός are found in P 1741,—sometimes 
side by side, as in §122. So with γίγνεσθαι and γίνεσθαι. Seealsom. ty. p. 179. 

2 Cp. H. Schmidt De Dual Graecorum et Emoriente et Reviviscente (Breslauer 
Philologische Abhandlungen vi. 4). 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 59 


use of Ionic forms, such as the genitive νηός (ὃ 78); of adverbs 
formed from participles, e.g. NavOavovtws (§ 181) and λελη- 
θότως (ὃ 297); and of such verbs as κρεμνῶν (ὃ 216) and 
χωνεύειν (§ 281). 

In regard to syntax the most noticeable feature of the 
treatise is, perhaps, the frequent use of the optative mood 
(which, like the dual, was affected by the Atticists), and the 
somewhat capricious insertion or omission of ἄν in connexion 
with it. Other points indicative of, or consistent with, a late 
date are: prepositions used in a strained sense (e.g. διά almost 
Ξε ἐκ, ὃ 12); rare verbal constructions (e.g. ζηλοτυπεῖν c. dat. 
§ 292); interchange of pronouns (e.g. ὅδε with οὗτος, τοσόσδε 
with τοσοῦτος, §§ 59, 189); use of ἤπερ after comparatives 
(e.g. § 12); inversions of the natural order of words (e.g. ἐπὶ 
τῶν Περσῶν τῆς ἀπληστίας, ὃ 126). Points of this kind will 
be discussed more fully in the Notes and Glossary. 

A general review of the internal evidence—subject-matter 
and language alike—would seem to suggest that the De 
Elocutione, in the form in which we have it, belongs not to 
the age of Demetrius Phalereus, but either to the first century 
B.C. or to the first century A.D." The rhetorical standpoint 
appears to be that of the Graeco-Roman period earlier than 
Hermogenes and (possibly) later than Dionysius. The 
language, likewise, is post-classical*. Marked by all the com- 
prehensiveness of the κοινή, which drew freely from so many 
sources, it also exhibits the learned archaism of the Atticists, 
but not of the stricter Atticists (including Hermogenes) of the 
second century A.D.—Such being the internal evidence as to 
the date of composition, we have now to ask what is the 
external evidence as to the name and identity of the author. 

1 Tt is necessary always to insert the limitation, ‘in the form in which we have 
it.’ If we are at liberty to assume interpolations and accretions, an earlier date 
may be postulated. Thus the Rhetorica ad Alexandrum is commonly regarded as 
the work of Anaximenes, though it contains such forms or phrases as εἵνεκα, καθυ- 
ποπτευθέντων, παλιλλογία, προγυμνάσματα, μήτε (for οὔτε), δράματα (for πράγματα), 
εἰδήσομεν, ἀναλογητέον, τὴν προτροπὴν πέρατι ὁρίσαι, οἷον ὀδὸς τών θυρών καὶ ὁδὸς ἣν 
βαδίζουσιν, εἰ μὲν τὰ πράγματα πιστὰ ἢ (Cope’s Latroduction to Aristotle's Rhetoric 


PP- 499-412, 438, 464). 
5. Not simply paulo-post-classical, as that of Demetrius Phalereus, described on 
Pp- 17, 18 supra. 


60 INTRODUCTION. 


II. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE.—CONCLUSION. 


(1) Allusions to the ‘‘De Elocutione”’ in other 
writings. The supposed allusions to the De Elocutione in 
other writings are doubtful if early, and late if well-authenti- 
cated. The earliest writer thought to refer to the work 
is Philodemus, who, in his Rhetoric iv. 16, says πονηρὸν 
yap εἰς ὑπόκρισιν ai μακραὶ περίοδοι, καθάπερ Kal παρὰ 
Δημητρίῳ κεῖται περὶ τῶν ᾿Ισοκράτους. It has been sug- 
gested that Philodemus here has in mind the De Elocutione 
§ 303 Kal αἱ περίοδοι δὲ ai συνεχεῖς καὶ μακραὶ καὶ ἀποπνί- 
γουσαι τοὺς λέγοντας οὐ μόνον κατακορὲς ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀτερπές. 
But it is improbable that the periods of Isocrates are specially 
meant in this passage, and consequently the supposed refer- 
ence is doubtful. Further, it is to be noticed that Philodemus 
speaks vaguely of ‘Demetrius’ without any addition; and 
so may, or may not, have Demetrius Phalereus in mind. It 
may be added that Cicero, who was contemporary with 
Philodemus, often refers to Demetrius Phalereus but betrays 
no knowledge of the De Elocutione. Nor does Diogenes 
Laertius (150 A.D.) make any mention of the De Elocutione 
in the long list he gives of the works of Demetrius Phalereus. 
On the other hand, Ammonius (500 A.D.), the son of Hermeias, 
in his commentary on the Aristotelian περὶ ‘Epunvelas, appears 
to mention the De E/ocutione and to ascribe it to ‘Demetrius’ 
(without addition): οὐ yap δὴ Kal αὐτὸς (ὁ ᾿Αριστοτέλης) 
καθάπερ Δημήτριος τὸ περὶ λογογραφικῆς ἰδέας βιβλίον 
συγγράψας, καὶ οὗτος αὐτὸ ἐπιγράψας περὶ “Epunvetas ἀξιοῖ 
καλεῖν ἑρμηνείαν τὴν λογογραφικὴν ἰδέαν (‘prose style’), ὡς 
δὴ περὶ ταύτης ἐν τῷ προκειμένῳ βιβλίῳ διαλεξόμενος. ..... 
διὰ τοῦτο ἐπέγραψε τὸ βιβλίον περὶ ᾿Ερμηνείας, ὡς οὐδὲν 
διαφέρον ἢ οὕτως ἐπιγράφειν ἢ περὶ τοῦ ἀποφαντικοῦ λόγου". 
The remaining testimony of the same kind is of still later 
date. Theophylact (eleventh century), archbishop of Bul- 


1 Berlin Aristotle iv. 96b, 97a. 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 61 


garia, has ὁ δὲ Φαληρεὺς καὶ περὶ ἑρμηνείας NOyou συνταγμάτιον 
σπουδαῖον ἐξήνεγκεν (Epist. ad Rom. Theoph., viii. 981); and 
a scholiast on Tzetzes (who himself belongs to the twelfth 
century) has ὁ Φαληρεὺς δὲ χάριν ὀνομάζει τὸ ἀστεῖον (Cramer, 
Anecdota Graeca ili. 384). The scholiasts on Hermogenes 
often (e.g. Gregor. Cor. vil. 1215 W., Anon. vii. 846, viii. 623, 
Max. Plan. v. 435) refer to the De Elocutione, but without 
implying anything as to the author’s name or date, except 
that he belonged to οἱ ἀρχαῖοι or of παλαιοί. This desig- 
nation, however, would not, with Byzantine scholiasts, neces- 
sarily imply the classical period, since late writers like Apsines 
and Hermogenes himself are so designated. And the 
scholiasts on Hermogenes belong, almost without exception, 
to Byzantine times, the best-known of them (Gregorius, the 
Metropolitan of Corinth) being not eaflier than the twelfth 
century. 

A passage from a writer of earlier date deserves separate 
mention. In his prolegomena to Hermogenes’ De /dezs, 
Syrianus (fourth century) has the following remarks: εἰ δὲ 
καὶ διενοήθησάν τινες ἐπιγράψαι τοὺς χαρακτῆρας Kal TO 
ποσὸν αὐτῶν συστῆσαι, τηνάλλως ἐποίησαν ὡς εἷς ἐστιν ὁ 
Διονύσιος " οὗτος γὰρ τρεῖς εἶναι χαρακτῆράς φησι, τὸν ἰσχνόν, 
τὸν μέσον, τὸν ἁδρόν: ὁ δὲ Ἵππαρχος προστίθησι τόν τε 
γραφικὸν καὶ τὸν ἀνθηρόν" ὁ δὲ Δημήτριος ἐκβάλλει τὸν γραφικὸν 
τοῖς τετράσιν ἀρεσκόμενος (Walz Rhet. Gr. vii. 93). It seems 
possible, notwithstanding discrepancies of terminology, that 
Dionysius of Halicarnassus and the author of the De Elo- 
cuttone are here meant; and if so, a further natural inference 
is that the latter was regarded as considerably later in date 
than the former, and that between them had come a certain 
Hipparchus, who had played a part of his own in the develop- 
ment of the Greek doctrine of prose style. 

(2) Manuscript Title. There still remains the evidence 
of P 1741,— evidence which is as old, and may be much older, 
than some of the testimony just mentioned. At the begin- 
ning of the treatise this manuscript gives Δημητρίου Φαληρέως 
περὶ ἑρμηνείας ὅ ἐστι περὶ φράσεως : at the end, simply Δημητρίου περὶ 
ἑρμηνείας. 


62 INTRODUCTION. 


The evidence of so excellent a manuscript as P 1741 is 
manifestly of the first importance and must be most carefully 
weighed. At the same time it must be remembered that the 
uncertainties presented by manuscript-titles in general are 
fully shared by those of this manuscript in particular. Con- 
siderable doubt attends the superscriptions it assigns to other 
works which it contains. One of its headings is τοῦτο τὸ 
μονόβιβλον, οἶμαι, Διονύσιος ὁ ᾿Αλικαρνασσεὺς συνέταξεν (the 
work thus designated being the Avs Rhetorica wrongly 
attributed to Dionysius of Halicarnassus), and another is 


Μενάνδρου ῥήτορος “Weneiinlian διαίρεσις τῶν ἐπιδεικτικῶν 
(where the letters added by the second hand indicate that the 
treatise in question may be the work either of Menander 
or of Genethlius). Moreover, the ascription to Demetrius 
Phalereus in particular is rendered doubtful by the fact 
that the name ‘ Demetrius’ only is given in the subscription 
of the treatise, and by the consideration that the name of 
Demetrius Phalereus would be readily supplied by conjecture 
because of the reputation for literary productivity enjoyed 
by the consulting founder of the Alexandrian Library, to 
whom (among other things) even the promotion of the 
Septuagint translation of the Old Testament was sometimes 
attributed. Or a special ground for the attribution may have 
been that the treatise was clearly Peripatetic in origin. That, 
however, it cannot as a whole, and in its present form, be the 
work of Demetrius Phalereus was probably discerned by the 
copyist who wrote against ὃ 289, σημείωσαι τί TO λεγόμενον, 
motos Δημήτριος καὶ τίς ὁ τάδε γράφων". 

It may be that the book was either originally issued 
anonymously, or by some accident in the course of its history 
lost its title, and that Demetrius is a mere conjecture designed 
to fill a vacant space. If so, Demetrius Phalereus is no doubt 
meant, both in the superscription and in the shorter sub- 
scription. But if Demetrius (without addition) is really the 


1 Supporters of the claims of Demetrius Phalereus have been Victorius during 
the Renaissance, and during modern times Durassier (with reservations), Liers and 
Roshdest wenski. 


DATE AND AUTHORSHIP. 63 


original author and title, then (with so common a name) a 
possible claimant may be suggested in almost any century 
according to conceptions, formed on other grounds, as to the 
probable date of production. Before mentioning some of 
the conjectures made on this basis, we must first refer 
to the hypothesis that Dionysius of Halicarnassus is the 
author—the only positive suggestion (of any importance) 
which travels beyond the names Demetrius or Demetrius 
Phalereus. 

Valesius (Henri de Valois) was the first to attribute the 
De Elocutione to Dionysius of Halicarnassus. He did so 
on the ground of a scholium on Aristophanes Clouds 401: 
καὶ χάρις ἐστὶν στίχου τοῦ ἀλλοτρίου, ὡς ἔφη Διονύσιος ὁ 
“Αλικαρνασσεὺς ἐν τῷ περὶ ἑρμηνείας, where the reference 
clearly is to the De Elocutione § 150 καὶ ἀπὸ στίχου δὲ 
ἀλλοτρίου γίνεται χάρις, ὡς ὁ ᾿Αριστοφάνης σκώπτων που 
τὸν Δία κτλ. But the scholium is probably no older than 
Musurus (fifteenth century), in whom it seems simply to be 
a slip of memory, and even if it were older, there is such 
a lack of confirmation for the statement from community of 
style or from any other quarter that the attribution would 
have to be classed with the similar ascription of the Azxs 
Rhetorica and the De Sublimitate to Dionysius regarded as 
an eminent and voluminous writer on rhetoric. 

The attribution of the treatise to Dionysius of Hali- 
carnassus may, thus, be rejected as inherently improbable 
and as lacking altogether in external evidence. if any special 
name is to be attached to the treatise, it must be that of some 
Demetrius (other than Demetrius Phalereus). But Demetrius 
is a very common name (in the larger classical dictionaries 
some 130 persons bearing this name are thought worthy of 
mention); and consequently many Demetriuses have at 
various times been suggested as possible authors. Muretus 
first put forward the Demetrius, an Alexandrian sophist 
of uncertain date, who according to Diogenes Laertius (v, 84) 
was the author of τέχναι pntopixai'. Another suggestion is 


1 This is the view adopted (after Muretus and Walz) by Saintsbury, History of 
Criticism, i. 89. There is much to be said for regarding Alexandria, rather than 


64 INTRODUCTION. 


that the author may be an otherwise unknown rhetorician or 
philosopher, Demetrius of Pergamus, who is supposed to 
have lived about 100 B.c. According to still another view, 
the Demetrius meant is Demetrius Syrus, whose rhetorical 
instruction Cicero enjoyed at Athens in the year 78 B.C. 
((ῖς. Μηγρί. 3515) 

Such suggestions as these serve only to show how far 
from a definite solution the problem still is; and (taken 
together with others not here mentioned) they may tend to 
throw doubt upon the validity of modern philological methods. 
But the real cause of uncertainty is the lack of sufficient 
evidence, and cautious statement is consequently the only 
safe course. As it stands, the evidence will hardly warrant 
any more precise conclusions as to the authorship and date 
of the De Elocutione than the following: (1) it is not, in its 
present form, the work of Demetrius Phalereus. whatever the 
weight of tradition in favour of this view; (2) it probably 
belongs either to the first century B.C. or the first century 
A.D., the latter period being on the whole the more likely ; 
(3) its author may have borne the name Demetrius. 


Rome, as the place where the book was produced. But for reasons already given 
the date is not likely to have been as late as the Age of the Antonines. Nor is it 
certain that the Alexandrian Demetrius belonged to so late a period.—Other 
references made by Mr Saintsbury to the De Zlocutione will be found on pp. 71, 103, 
104, 196 zbid. 


“gee ‘joy 1 ἢ 


wey da ronyrt nab amr. tedy Gort od 9-400 dy Aodirty ey, Ὁ «1. 
nom igor so St hy ey σατο πογίστ nat peor αι, doh «οὐδ΄ «βγῇ <> 
nnfra 8 blag gam atgrt ony dam 6, 9 οὐ ΜΝ ort othp atin. ued ot. « 


Lema ten yoo onder seg Φρίσν, ἀσυννῖ στ greta an 20 Jin 2 
Loobpet wea. alodnootn o rep tolydoto “ὦ οτος ἀπὸ 


49. πααυνγή 6. 


᾿ ᾧ 3 Ἢ Sn 
ἔν ὶ é 
EES age ᾿σντίν) Seavelo Van το Lnod «ἡ ον γ 
Ε ἀά ie γα Ὁ β 
! τε ὲ 


ΕἸΣ operate δῖ, aie rac. 
ἡ plod 0 ἜΣ nda. Snob dna eic.aredgach)av’y dong 1.5.1. 
Ee Feinods Nam lyin lg neeiodmige/ dodgers tare xg y lr 


srrpiodetig Ayr/o Norte am cpimarmyonnL Nb C14 deme oro twig rob 


asst a lpn deg a obo ot ad ῥδνοῖς γα ig ign OD 


Leap iim aNd p U 99 δον dN aed) y Im adavephorlituwn 
ie 7 ᾿ d - fe “ ξ 


δ. 

φ 

3 r 4 
ve Bs 
Ὁ ΩΝ 
Ὁ ae 


alias 
ae ott aes 


DEMETRII PHALEREI QVI FERTVR 
DE ELOCVTIONE LIBER 
AD FIDEM POTISSIMVM CODICIS ANTIQVISSIMI 
PARISINI 1741 (P) 


EDITVS 


ET IN SERMONEM ANGLICVM CONVERSVS. 


AHMHTPIOY 


[PAAHPEQS] 


ΠΕΡΙ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 
[0 ἘΣΤῚ ΠΕΡῚ ΦΡΑΣΒΏΣΙ. 


ν A lal a 
I. Ὥσπερ ἡ ποίησις διαιρεῖται τοῖς μέτροις, οἷον P. fol. : 
τ ΄' nv ε , EN an » “ \ \ δ 
ἡμιμέτροις ἢ ἑξαμέτροις ἢ τοῖς ἄλλοις, οὕτω καὶ τὴν 
ἑρμηνείαν τὴν λογικὴν διαιρεῖ καὶ διακρίνει τὰ καλούμενα 
n , 5 7 ἊΣ ͵΄ / Ν Ν / 
κῶλα, καθάπερ ἀναπαύοντα τὸν λέγοντά τε καὶ τὰ λεγό- 
5 ’ὔ, Ν 5 Lal ν ε ,ὔ N 7) 5 4 
το μενα αὐτά, Kal EV πολλοῖς ὅροις ὁρίζοντα τὸν λόγον, ἐπεί 
τοι μακρὸς ἂν εἴη καὶ ἄπειρος καὶ ἀτεχνῶς πνίγων τὸν 
λέγοντα. 
2. Βούλεται μέντοι διάνοιαν ἀπαρτίζειν τὰ κῶλα 
“ Ν Ν ν ,ὕ eS e ε ans 
ταῦτα, ποτὲ μὲν ὅλην διάνοιαν, οἷον ws ᾿καταῖός φησιν 
39 Ω Ὁ a an ε ΄ ες Ta ΄ i 
15 ἐν Τῇ APXH τῆς ιστορίας, Exatatos Μιλήσιος ὧδε μυ- 
“ ° 4 Ν 4 lal » ν ν Ν 
θεῖται: συνείληπται γὰρ διάνοια τῷ κώλῳ ὁλῳ ON, καὶ 
4 - 5 4 4 Ν “ ν 
ἄμφω συγκαταλήγουσιν. ἐνίοτε μέντοι τὸ κῶλον ὁλην 
Ν 5 “ὦ ὃ ὔὕ 4 δὲ ν A ε Ν 
μὲν οὐ συμπεραιοῖ διάνοιαν, μέρος δὲ ὁλὴῆς ὁλον: ὡς γὰρ 
τῆς χειρὸς οὔσης ὅλου τινὸς μέρη αὐτῆς ὅλα ὅλης ἐστίν, 
“οοἷον δάκτυλοι καὶ πῆχυς: ἰδίαν γὰρ περιγραφὴν ἔχει 
τούτων τῶν μερῶν ἕκαστον, καὶ ἴδια μέρη: οὕτω καὶ δια- 
΄ N Ψ » , 3 , 5 A 
νοίας τινὸς ὅλης οὔσης μεγάλης ἐμπεριλαμβάνοιυτ ἂν 
μέρη τινὰ αὐτῆς ὁλόκληρα ὄντα καὶ αὐτά. ὶ 
9; 10 λέγοντά τε καὶ τὰ λεγόμενα] Finckhius, λόγον τά τε καταλεγόμενα P. 


ΤΙ ὥς supra versum scripsit Ρ. 14 οἷον per compendium hic et plerumque, 
plene ν. τ scripsit P. 15 μηλίσιος P. 19 ὅλης] Victorius, ὅλη P. 


20 πῆχυς] Schneiderus, πήχεις P. 


DEVI 55. ONT Sievers: 


(ΗΑ ΡΠ ΓΊΞΙΝ I 


1. AS verse is articulated by measures (such as the 
hemistich, the hexameter, and the like), so also is prose 
articulated and differentiated by what are called ‘members.’ 
These members give rest, one might say, to the speaker and 
his discourse; they set bounds to its various parts, since it 
would otherwise extend itself without limit and would simply 
run the speaker out of breath. 

2. But the proper function of such members is to mark 
the conclusion of a thought or sentence. Sometimes a 
member forms a complete sentence in itself, as for example 
Hecataeus opens his ‘ History’ with the words ‘ Hecataeus 
of Miletus thus relates!” where a complete member coincides 
with a complete sentence and both end together. Sometimes, 
however, the member constitutes not a complete sentence, but 
a part of it, yet a complete part. For just as the arm, which 
is a whole of a certain kind, has parts such as fingers and 
forearm which themselves again are wholes, inasmuch as each 
of them has its proper limits, and itself is made up of parts; 
so also a complete sentence, when it is extensive, may very 
well comprise within itself parts which themselves are integral. 


1 Hecat. Fragm. 332, C. F. Miiller # #. G. 1. p. 25. 


5—2 


σι 


10 


σι 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


68 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


3. Ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ ἀρχῇ τῆς ᾿Αναβάσεως τῆς Ξενο- 

φῶντος τὸ τοιοῦτον, “Δαρείου καὶ Παρυσάτιδος᾽ μέχρι 

“ « 4 Ν A“ ᾽ 4 “ 4, 4 
Tov “νεώτερος δὲ Κῦρος, συντετελεσμένη πᾶσα διάνοιά 
5 Ν 3 5 > ὋΝ A 4 l4 Ν 5 “A ε / / 
ἐστιν: τὰ δ᾽ ἐν αὐτῇ κῶλα δύο μέρη μὲν αὐτῆς ἑκάτερόν 
ἐστι, διάνοια δὲ ἐν ἑκατέρῳ πληροῦταί τις, ἴδιον ἔχουσα 
͵΄ ae ς ,, Ν / / ΜᾺ ᾿ 
πέρας, οἷον “Δαρείου καὶ Παρυσάτιδος γίνονται παῖδες. 
» / ε ΄ ε , 3 ΙΝ > ε ΄ Ψ 
ἔχει γάρ τινα ὁλοκληρίαν ἡ διάνοια αὐτὴ καθ᾽ αὑτήν, ὅτι 
5 4 ’ὔ Ν / A Ν ε 72 
ἐγένοντο Δαρείῳ καὶ Παρυσάτιδι παῖδες. καὶ ὡσαύτως 
Ν ΄. los Ψ « 7 Ν 3 ΄ 
τὸ ἕτερον κῶλον, ὅτι ‘mpecBUTEpos μὲν ᾿Αρταξέρξης, 

͵ὕ \ lol 7 ν ἊΝ Ν lal ε ΄ ᾽ὔ 
νεώτερος δὲ Κῦρος. wore τὸ μὲν κῶλον, ὡς φημί, διά- 
νοιαν περιέξει τινὰ πάντη πάντως, ἤτοι ὅλην ἢ μέρος 
ὅλης ὅλον. 

lo \ yy , Ν la Ν los 5 ,ὔ 
4. Δεῖ δὲ οὔτε πάνυ μακρὰ ποιεῖν τὰ κῶλα, ἐπεί τοι 

΄ π ε ΄ x , 5 Ν 
γίνεται ἄμετρος ἡ σύνθεσις ἢ δυσπαρακολούθητος: οὐδὲ 
Ν ε Ν ε Ν ε J ΓΝ 3 ΄ 5 
γὰρ ἡ ποιητικὴ ὑπὲρ ἑξάμετρον ἦλθεν, εἰ μή που ἐν 
ὀλίγοις: γελοῖον γὰρ τὸ μέτρον ἄμετρον εἶναι, καὶ κατα- 
λήγοντος τοῦ μέτρου ἐπιλελῆσθαι ἡμᾶς πότε ἤρξατο. οὔτε 
δὴ τὸ μῆκος τῶν κώλων πρέπον τοῖς λόγοις διὰ τὴν 
ἀμετρίαν, οὔτε ἡ μικρότης, ἐπεί τοι γίνοιτ᾽ ἂν ἡ λεγομένη 

δ ΄ a ε ΄ὕ -ε ΄ ΄ ε ΄, 
ξηρὰ σύνθεσις, οἷον ἡ τοιάδε “ὁ βίος βραχύς, ἡ τέχνη 
μακρά, ὁ καιρὸς ὀξύς. κατακεκομμένη γὰρ ἔοικεν ἡ 
σύνθεσις καὶ κεκερματισμένη, καὶ εὐκαταφρόνητος διὰ τὸ 
μικρὰ σύμπαντα ἔχειν. 

5. Γίνεται μὲν οὖν ποτε καὶ μακροῦ κώλου καιρός, 
οἷον ἐν τοῖς μεγέθεσιν, ὡς ὁ Πλάτων φησί, “τὸ γὰρ δὴ 
πᾶν τόδε τοτὲ μὲν αὐτὸς ὁ θεὸς πορευόμενον συμποδηγεῖ 

Ν yy) Ν Ν ln ΄ lal ΄ 
καὶ συγκυκλεῖ. σχεδὸν γὰρ τῷ μεγέθει τοῦ κώλου συνεξ- 
ἤρται καὶ ὁ λόγος. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἑξάμετρον ἡρῷόν 
nw ο 
τε ὀνομάζεται ὑπὸ τοῦ μήκους καὶ πρέπον | ἥρωσιν, καὶ 


5. τις (pron. indef.) accentum habet hic et alibi in P. αὑτήν : sine 
spiritu P. 9. dprapxés, addito ξέ supra ap P. 17 πότε] Schneiderus, 
ἡ oTe Ῥ. 17, 18 οὔτε δὴ] Victorius, οὔτε δὲ P. 19 σημείωσαι πῶς ἡ ξηρὰ 
γίνεται σύνθεσις in margine P. 20, σύνθεσης (corr. in σύνθεσις) P. 22 σύν- 
θεσης (punctis supra 7 positis) P. 25 τὸ yap πᾶν sine δὴ codd. Platonis. 
26 τοτὲ μὲν] codd. Plat., τὸ μὲν P. πορευόμενον συμποδηγεῖ] codd. Platonis, 


πορευόμενος ποδηγεῖ P. 


226" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 69 


3. At the beginning of the ‘Anabasis’ of Xenophon an 
example will be found, in the words ‘ Darius and Parysatis’ 
down to ‘the younger Cyrus!’ This is a fully completed 
sentence, of which the two members contained in it are parts ; 
but each of these, within its own limits, conveys a meaning 
which is in a measure complete. Take the first words: ‘ Darius 
and Parysatis had sons. The thought that sons were born 
to Darius and Parysatis has its own completeness. The 
second member, in the same way, conveys the complete 
thought that ‘the elder was Artaxerxes, the younger Cyrus.’ 
Accordingly, as I maintain, a ‘member’ must be understood 
to comprise a thought which either is a complete sentence or 
forms an integral part of one. 

4. Members should not be made very long; otherwise 
the composition becomes unwieldy or hard to follow. 
With rare exceptions, poetry is not written in measures of 
greater length than six feet, since it would be absurd that 
measure should be without measure, and that by the time 
the line comes to an end we should have forgotten when it 
began. But if long members are out of place in discourse 
owing to their unwieldy character, so also are brief members 
for the reason that they produce the so-called ‘arid’ com- 
position, exemplified in the words ‘life is short, art long, 
opportunity fleeting’ The composition here seems to be 
minced fine, and may fail to impress because everything 
about it is so minute. 

5. Occasionally a lengthened member is appropriate. 
For example, in elevated passages, as when Plato says: ‘At 
times God himself guides this universe and helps to roll it in 
its course*’ The elevation of the language corresponds, it 
may be said, to the length of the member. It is because its 
length fits it for heroic subjects that the hexameter is called 


1 Xen. Anab. i. 1, Δαρείου καὶ Παρυσάτιδος γίγνονται παῖδες δύο, πρεσβύτερος 
μὲν ᾿Αρταξέρξης, νεώτερος δὲ Κῦρος. 

2 Hippocr., Aphorism. i. τ (Littré, Quvres completes αἱ Hippocrate, τν. 
458). 

3 Plat. Politicus 269, τὸ yap πᾶν τοτὲ μὲν αὐτὸς ὁ θεὸς ξυμποδηγεῖ πορευόμενον 
καὶ συγκυκλεῖ, τοτὲ ὃ ἀνῆκεν, ὅτε αἱ περίοδοι τοῦ προσήκοντος αὐτῷ μέτρον εἰλήφωσιν 
ἤδη χρόνου, κτλ. 


70 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


5 “Ὁ Ν ε 4 > ’ὔ / / Lat 
οὐκ ἂν τὴν Ὁμήρου ᾿Ιλιάδα πρεπόντως τις γράψειεν τοῖς 
3 - 
Ἀρχιλόχου βραχέσιν, οἷον 
> / / 
ἀχνυμένη σκυτάλη 
και 
/ \ / , 
5 τίς σὰς παρήειρε φρένας ; 
οὐδὲ τοῖς ᾿Ανακρέοντος, «ὡς» τὸ 
φέρ᾽ ὕδωρ, φέρ᾽ οἶνον, ὦ παῖ; 
θύ Ν ε ε Ν > Lal 4 > 4 
μεθύοντος yap ὁ ῥυθμὸς ἀτεχνῶς γέροντος, οὐ μαχομένου 
ν 
ἥρωος. 
το 6. Μακροῦ μὲν δὴ κώλου καιρὸς γίνοιτ᾽ av ποτε διὰ 
ταῦτα" γίνοιτο δ᾽ ἂν ποτε καὶ βραχέος, οἷον ἤτοι μικρόν 
ε an λ / ε ε (=| las Ψ > ’ὔ 
τι ἡμῶν λεγόντων, ὡς ὁ Ξενοφῶν φησιν, ὅτι ἀφίκοντο 
ot Ἕλληνες ἐπὶ τὸν Τηλεβόαν ποταμόν: “οὗτος δὲ Hv 
Ν x ? lal a 
μέγας μὲν ov, καλὸς δέ TH yap μικρότητι Kal ἀποκοπῇ 
15 τοῦ ῥυθμοῦ συνανεφάνη καὶ ἡ μικρότης τοῦ ποταμοῦ καὶ 
χάρις: εἰ δὲ οὕτως ἐκτείνας αὐτὸ εἶπεν, ‘ οὗτος δὲ μεγέθει 
μὲν ἣν ἐλάττων τῶν πολλῶν, κάλλει δὲ ὑπερεβάλλετο 
πάντας, τοῦ πρέποντος ἀπετύγχανεν ἀν, καὶ ἐγίγνετο ὁ 
λεγόμενος ψυχρός: ἀλλὰ περὶ ψυχρότητος μὲν ὕστερον 
20 λεκτέον. 
“ Ν nw 4 > / ~ , > 
7. Τῶν dé μικρῶν κώλων κἀν δεινότητι χρῆσίς ἐστι: 
δεινότερον γὰρ τὸ ἐν ὀλίγῳ πολὺ ἐμφαινόμενον καὶ 
ρον γὰρ γᾷ μφαινόμ 
σφοδρότερον, διὸ καὶ οἱ Λάκωνες βραχυλόγοι ὑπὸ δει- 
νότητος: καὶ τὸ μὲν ἐπιτάσσειν σύντομον καὶ βραχύ, 
55 καὶ πᾶς δεσπότης δούλῳ μονοσύλλαβος, τὸ δὲ ἱκετεύειν 
Ν Ν Ν 5 7, ε Ν Ὁ «ὦ Ν 
μακρὸν καὶ τὸ ὀδύρεσθαι. at Λιταὶ kal’ Ὅμηρον καὶ 
χωλαὶ καὶ ῥυσαὶ ὑπὸ βραδυτῆτος, τουτέστιν ὑπὸ μακρο- 
λογίας, καὶ οἱ γέροντες μακρολόγοι διὰ τὴν ἀσθένειαν. 
8. Παράδειγμα δὲ βραχείας συνθέσεως τὸ “Λακεδαί- 
30 μόνιοι Φιλίππῳ: Διονύσιος ἐν Κορίνθῳ. πολὺ γὰρ δει- 


I γράψειεν] Victorius, γράψει ἐν Ῥ. 6 ὡς post -ος omissum restitui : 
Cp. p- 190, 10, 25; p- 192, 0. 8 ἀτέχνως P. 11 βραχέως P. 12 ἀφίκοντο 
εχ ἀφήκοντο Ῥ. 14 καλὸς μέν, μέγας δ᾽ οὔ Xenophontis codd. 21 κἂν Ρ. 
22 ὅτι δεινότερον τὸ ἐν ὀλίγῳ πολὺ ἐμφαινόμενον in margine P. 24 ἐπει 


τάσσειν P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 71 


heroic verse. The ‘Iliad’ of Homer could not fittingly be 
written in the brief lines of Archilochus, e.g. 


Staff sorrow-stricken!? ; 
or 
Who made thy wits swerve from the track”? 


nor in the lines of Anacreon, e.g. :— 

Bring water, bring wine too, page-boy®. 
That is just the rhythm for an old man drunk, but not for 
a hero in battle. 

6. Sometimes, then, a long member may be appropriate 
for the reasons given; at other times a short one may be 
fitting, as when our subject is something small. Xenophon, 
for example, says of the river Teleboas, in the passage where 
he describes the arrival of the Greeks on its banks: ‘it was 
not large; beautiful it was, though*” The slight and broken 
rhythm brings into relief both the smallness and the beauty 
of the river. If Xenophon had expanded the idea and said : 
‘this river was in size less than other rivers, but in beauty 
it surpassed them all, he would have failed in propriety, 
and we should have had the so-called frigid writer. Con- 
cerning frigidity, however, we must speak later. 

7. Short members may also be employed in vigorous 
passages. There is greater vigour and intensity when much 
meaning is conveyed in a few words. Accordingly it is 
just because of their vehemence that the Lacedaemonians are 
chary of speech. Orders are given concisely and _ briefly, 
every master being curt towards his slave. Supplication, 
on the other hand, and lamentation are lengthy. Homer 
represents the Prayers as wrinkled and lame’® in allusion to 
their tardiness, which is tantamount to saying their prolixity. 
Old men, too, are prolix owing to their feebleness. 

8. As an instance of concise wording the following may 
be given, ‘The Lacedaemonians to Philip: Dzonystus at 


1 Archil. ragm. 89, Bergk P. 2. G.A—Here, and elsewhere, the verse render- 
ings are from the hand of Mr A. S. Way. 
2 Archil. Fragm. 94, Bergk?. 
3 Anacr. Fragm. 62, Bergk?. + Xen. Azad. iv. 4. 3. 
> Hom. //. ix. 502, 
καὶ γάρ τε Aural εἰσι Διὸς κοῦραι μεγάλοιο, 
χωλαί τε ῥυσαί τε παραβλῶπές 7’ ὀφθαλμώ. 


Jo 


15 


20 


25 


72 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


/ ΄ὕ ε Ν ν ͵΄ “Ὁ »Ὰ Ὗ ἃ 
νότερον φαίνεται ῥηθὲν οὕτω βραχέως, ἢ εἴπερ αὐτὸ 
μακρῶς ἐκτείναντες εἶπον, ὅτι ὃ Διονύσιός ποτε μέγας ὧν 
τύραννος ὥσπερ σὺ ὅμως νῦν ἰδιωτεύων οἰκεῖ Κόρινθον. 
οὐ γὰρ ἔτι διὰ πολλῶν ῥηθὲν ἐπιπλήξει ἐῴκει, ἀλλὰ 
ὃ ΄ Ν na / / 5 5 lal 
νηγήματι, Kal μᾶλλόν τινι διδάσκοντι, οὐκ ἐκφοβοῦντι: 
οὕτως ἐκτεινόμενον ἐκλύεται τοῦ λόγου τὸ θυμικὸν καὶ 
7 ν Ν 4 ᾽ὕ ε Ν 4 
σφοδρόν. ὥσπερ τὰ θηρία συστρέψαντα ἑαυτὰ μάχεται, 
τοιαύτη τις ἂν εἴη συστροφὴ καὶ λόγου καθάπερ ἐσπειρα- 
μένου πρὸς δεινότητα. 
ε Ν 4 4 Ν Ν 4 / 

9. Ἡ δὲ τοιαύτη βραχύτης κατὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν κόμμα 
> , ε 72) 3 εν “ / 5) \ Ν ΄ 
ὀνομάζεται. ὁρίζονται δ᾽ αὐτὸ ὧδε, κόμμα ἐστὶν τὸ κώλου 
» a δ ΄ ΄ 5 ΄ ye ἦν ἢ 
ἔλαττον, οἷον τὸ προειρημένον, τό τε“Διονύσιος ἐν Κορίνθῳ, 

Ν Ν « “ ͵ὕ ᾽ Ν ΝΟ aA? Ν na an 
καὶ τὸ “γνῶθι σεαυτόν, Kal τὸ “ἕπου θεῷ, τὰ τῶν σοφῶν. 
ἔστι γὰρ καὶ ἀποφθεγματικὸν ἡ βραχύτης καὶ γνωμο- 
λογικόν, καὶ σοφώτερον τὸ ἐν ὀλίγῳ πολλὴν διάνοιαν 
5 ἴω ᾽’ὔ 5 “ 4 4 ν 
ἡθροῖσθαι, καθάπερ ἐν τοῖς σπέρμασιν δένδρων ὅλων | 
δυνάμεις: εἰ δ᾽ ἐκτείνοιτό τις τὴν γνώμην ἐν μακροῖς, 
διδασκαλία γίνεταί τις καὶ ῥητορεία ἀντὶ γνώμης. 

10. Τῶν μέντοι κώλων καὶ κομμάτων τοιούτων συν- 

4 Ν 2 ,ὔ ε /? . , 
τιθεμένων πρὸς ἄλληλα συνίστανται at περίοδοι ὀνομαζό- 
Ey 
μεναι. ἔστιν γὰρ ἣ περίοδος σύστημα ἐκ κώλων ἢ κομ- 
μάτων εὐκαταστρόφως εἰς τὴν διάνοιαν τὴν ὑποκειμένην 
a Y ἴω 4 
ἀπηρτισμένον, οἷον 'μάλιστα μὲν εἵνεκα τοῦ νομίζειν 
4 Lal / , Ν , > Ἂ ~ 
συμφέρειν τῇ πόλει λελύσθαι τὸν νόμον, εἶτα καὶ TOU 
Ν ν an v2 e , vA e ΕΝ 
παιδὸς εἵνεκα τοῦ Χαβρίου, ὡμολόγησα τούτοις, ὡς ἂν 
οἷός τε ὦ, συνερεῖν" αὕτη γὰρ ἡ περίοδος ἐκ τριῶν κώλων 
οὖσα καμπήν τέ τινα καὶ συστροφὴν ἔχει κατὰ τὸ τέλος. 

II. ᾿Αριστοτέλης δὲ ὁρίζεται τὴν περίοδον οὕτως, 
« ΄ δό 5 ΄ 5 Ν » Ν Ν ΄ 9 aN 
περίοδός ἐστι λέξις ἀρχὴν ἔχουσα καὶ τελευτήν, μάλα 


8, 9. éometpapévoxxxmpos (lac. et ras.) Ρ. 11 ὅρος κόμματος in margine P. 
τό ὅλλων P. 17 ealterum (h.e. δὲ) supra ε in δεκτείνοιτο scripsit P. 1g περὶ 
περιόδου titulus in P, 21 τί ἐστι περίοδος in margine P. | **« (fuit fort. καί) 
ἔστιν γὰρ ἡ περίοδος (γὰρ ἡ supra versum scripto) P. 22 εὐκαταστρόφως 
in εὐκαταστρόφων corr. m. rec. P. els] Schenklius coll. Aristide 11.+507, 8 (Sp.), 
πρὸς in ras. et compend. m. rec. P. 28 ὅρος περιόδου κατὰ ἀριστοτέλην 
in margine P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 73 


Corinth. This brief expression is felt to be far more forcible 
than if the Lacedaemonians had said at full length that 
Dionysius, although once a mighty monarch like yourself, 
now resides at Corinth in a private station. Once the state- 
ment is given in full, it resembles not a rebuke but a narra- 
tive; it suggests the instructor rather than the intimidator. 
The passion and vehemence of the expression are enfeebled 
when thus extended. Asa wild beast gathers itself together 
for the attack, so should discourse gather itself together as 
in a coil in order to increase its vigour. 

9. From the point of view of composition such brevity 
is termed a ‘phrase. A ‘phrase’ is commonly defined as 
‘that which is less than a member, for example the already 
quoted words ‘ Dionysius at Corinth,’ and the two sayings of 
the sages ‘Know thyself’ and ‘Follow God. For brevity 
suits apophthegms and maxims; and it is a mark of superior 
skill to compress much thought in a little space, just as seeds 
contain potentially entire trees. Draw out the maxim at full 
length, and it becomes a homily or a piece of rhetoric rather 
than a maxim. 

10. From the union of a number of these members and 
phrases are formed what are called ‘periods. Now the 
period is a collection of members or phrases, arranged 
dexterously to fit the thought to be expressed. For example: 
‘Chiefly because I thought it was to the interest of the State 
that the law should be abrogated, but also for the sake of 
Chabrias’ boy, I have agreed to plead, to the best of my 
ability, my clients’ case’’ This period, consisting of three 
members, has a certain bend and concentration at the 
end. 

11. Aristotle defines the period thus: ‘a period is a 
form of expression which has a beginning and an end’. The 


1 Dem. Leff. init.: ΓΑνδρες δικασταί, μάλιστα μὲν εἵνεκα τοῦ νομίζειν συμφέρειν 
τῇ πόλει λελύσθαι τὸν νόμον, εἶτα καὶ τοῦ παιδὸς εἵνεκα τοῦ Χαβρίου, ὡμολόγησα 
τούτοις, ὡς ἂν οἷός τ’ ὦ, συνερεῖν. 

2 Aristot. Rhet. ili. 9, λέγω δὲ περίοδον λέξιν ἔχουσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ τελευτὴν αὐτὴν 


καθ᾽ αὑτὴν καὶ μέγεθος εὐσύνοπτον. 


74 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


»“ Ν ὔ ε / > Ν Ν ε Ν ’ὔὕ 
καλῶς καὶ πρεπόντως ὁρισάμενος" εὐθὺς γὰρ ὁ τὴν περίο- 
ὃ λέ 5 ’ὔ ν > , \ 5 4 

ov λέγων ἐμφαίνει, oT. HpKTat ποθεν καὶ ἀποτελευτήσει 
Ἄν 79. ΄ » , ν ε a 5 ΄ 
ποι καὶ ἐπείγεται εἴς τι τέλος, ὥσπερ οἱ δρομεῖς ἀφεθέντες: 
καὶ γὰρ ἐκείνων συνεμφαίνεται τῇ ἀρχῇ τοῦ δρόμου τὸ 
/ »» \ / ὃ 5 / 5 la Lal 
5TéAos. ἔνθεν καὶ περίοδος ὠνομάσθη, ἀπεικασθεῖσα ταῖς 
ε La) lal 4 \ , / 5 A 
ὁδοῖς ταῖς κυκλοειδέσι Kal περιωδευμέναις. καθόλου οὐδὲν 
ε 4 / 5 ἈΝ Ν 4 θ > “ , 
ἡ περίοδός ἐστι πλὴν ποιὰ σύνθεσις. εἰ γοῦν λυθείη 
αὐτῆς τὸ περιωδευμένον καὶ μετασυντεθείη, τὰ μὲν πράγ- 
ματα μένει τὰ αὐτά, περίοδος δὲ οὐκ ἔσται, οἷον εἰ τὴν 
10 προειρημένην τις τοῦ Δημοσθένους περίοδον ἀναστρέψας 
» DOE ¢ na / Ss 4 ὃ > 0 wn / 
εἴποι WOE πως, ‘ συνερῶ τούτοις, ὦ avdpes ᾿Αθηναῖοι: φίλος 
/ / 5 ε en / Ν ἊΝ ἊΜ ’ὔ 
γάρ μοί ἐστιν 6 υἱὸς Χαβρίου, πολὺ δὲ μᾶλλον τούτου 
ἡ πόλις, ἣ συνειπεῖν με δίκαιόν ἐστιν. οὐ γὰρ ETL οὐ- 
δαμοῦ ἡ περίοδος εὑρίσκεται. 
/ 3 5 an ν lay ε vA ε Ν 3 
15 12. Γένεσις ὃ αὑτῆς noe. TNS ἑρμηνείας ἡ μὲν OVO- 
μάζεται κατεστραμμένη, οἷον ἡ κατὰ περιόδους ἔχουσα, 
ε ε ἴων 5 4 ε ἴων Ν 72 W 2) 
ὡς ἡ τῶν ᾿Ισοκρατείων ῥητορειῶν Kat Τοργίου καὶ ᾿Αλκι- 
ὃ / Ψ Ν Ν / . 5 \ La) ww 4 
ἄμαντος" ὅλαι yap διὰ περιόδων εἰσὶν συνεχῶν οὐδέν τι 
y » ε (+ 4 7 ὃ 3 ε ᾽7ὕ ε ὃ ’ 
ἔλαττον ἥπερ ἡ Ὁμήρου ποίησις dv ἑξαμέτρων: ἡ δέ 
"οτις διῃρημένη ἑρμηνεία καλεῖται, ἡ εἰς κῶλα λελυμένη 
5 , > , 4 ε ε ε ᾽ὔ Ἂν ἊΝ 
οὐ μάλα ἀλλήλοις συνηρτημένα, ὡς ἢ Exatatov, καὶ τὰ 

An an ε 7) Ν᾿ ῃἣ e 5 / nr ΄ὔ 
πλεῖστα τῶν Ηροδότου, καὶ ὅλως ἡ ἀρχαία πᾶσα. παρά- 
δειυγμα αὐτῆς, “Ἑκαταῖος Μιλήσιος ὧδε μυθεῖται: τάδε 
γράφω, ws μοι δοκεῖ ἀληθέα εἶναι: οἱ γὰρ “Ἑλλήνων λόγοι 

’ὔ Ν “ ε 5 Ν , > 4 ᾿] ν 
25 πολλοί τε καὶ γελοῖοι, WS ἐμοὶ φαίνονται, εἰσίν. ὠσπερ 
ἊΝ , 5 > > 4 Ν n Ὑ Ν 
γὰρ σεσωρευμένοις ἐπ᾽ ἀλλήλοις τὰ κῶλα EOLKEV καὶ 
ἐπερριμμένοις καὶ οὐκ ἔχουσιν σύνδεσιν οὐδ᾽ ἀντέρεισιν, 
οὐδὲ βοηθοῦντα ἀλλήλοις ὥσπερ ἐν ταῖς περιόδοις. 
13. Ἔοικε γοῦν τὰ μὲν περιοδικὰ κῶλα τοῖς λίθοις 


30 τοῖς ἀντερείδουσι τὰς περιφερεῖς στέγας καὶ συνέχουσι, 


I ὡρισάμενος Ῥ. 2, 3 ἀποτελευτήσει ποι καὶ] ΗΒ. Stephanus, ἀποτελευ- 
τῆσαι ποιεῖ καὶ Ῥ. 6 περιοδευμέναις Ῥ. 7 εἰ γοῦν ex ἠγοῦν P. IO τις 
ex τῆς Ρ. 12 πολλὺ Ρ. 16 κατεστρεμμένη P. 17 ἰσοκρατίων P. | ῥη- 
τορειῶν] Weilius, ῥητῶν P. 23 μηλίσιος P. 24 ἀλήθεια Ρ. 29 ὡραῖον 
(compend.) in margine Ρ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 75 


definition is good and fitting. The very use of the word 
‘period’ implies that there has been a beginning at one point 
and will be an ending at another, and that we are hastening 
towards a definite goal as runners do when they leave the 
starting-place. For at the very beginning of their race the 
end of the course is manifest. Whence the name ‘period,’ 
the image being that of paths traversed in a circle. It may 
be said in general that a period is nothing more or less than 
a particular arrangement of words. If its circular form is 
destroyed and the arrangement changed, the subject-matter 
remains the same, but the period will have disappeared. 
This may be illustrated by some such alteration as the 
following in the period of Demosthenes already quoted: ‘I 
will support the complainants, men of Athens. For Chabrias’ 
son is dear to me, and much more so is the State, whose 
cause it is right for me to plead’’ No longer is there any 
period to be seen. 

12. The origin of the period is as follows. There are 
two kinds of style. The first is termed the ‘compacted’ 
style, as for example that which consists of periods. It is 
found in the discourses of Isocrates, Gorgias and Alcidamas, 
in which the periods succeed one another with no less 
regularity than the hexameters in the poetry of Homer. The 
second style bears the name of ‘disconnected, inasmuch as 
the members into which it is divided are not closely united. 
Hecataeus is an example; and so for the most part is 
Herodotus, and the older writers in general. Here is an 
instance: ‘ Hecataeus of Miletus thus relates. I write these 
things as they seem to me to be true. For the tales told by 
the Greeks are, as it appears to me, many and absurd?’ 
Here the members seem thrown upon one another in a heap 
without the union or propping, and without the mutual 
support, which we find in periods. 

18. The members in a periodic style may, in fact, be 
compared to the stones which support and hold together a 


1 Cp. ὃ 10 supra. 2 Hecat. Fragm. 332 (cp. ὃ 2 supra). 


σι 


To 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


30 


76 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


Ν Ν lal ,ὕ ε ΄ , ’ 
τὰ δὲ τῆς διαλελυμένης ἑρμηνείας διερριμμένοις πλησίον 
λίθοις μόνον | καὶ οὐ συγκειμένοις. 

XN Ν ΄ » ε ε ty ε Ν 

14. Διὸ καὶ περιεξεσμένον ἔχει τι ἡ ἑρμηνεία ἡ πρὶν 
καὶ εὐσταλές, ὥσπερ καὶ τὰ ἀρχαῖα ἀγάλματα, ὧν τέχνη 
ἐδόκει ἡ συστολὴ καὶ ἰσχνότης, ἡ δὲ τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα 

ε ᾽’ὔ la / 5, κά » »᾿ ’ Ν 
ἑρμηνεία τοῖς Φειδίου ἔργοις ἤδη ἔοικεν ἔχουσά τι καὶ 
μεγαλεῖον καὶ ἀκριβὲς ἅμα. 

/ Ν Ν », ,ὔ / ν Ν 
15. Δοκιμάζω γὰρ δὴ ἔγωγε μήτε περιόδοις ὅλον τὸν 
λόγον συνείρεσθαι, ὡς 6 Topyiov, μήτε διαλελύσθαι ὅλον, 
ὡς τὰ ἀρχαῖα, ἀλλὰ μεμῖχθαι μᾶλλον δι ἀμφοτέρων᾽: 
οὕτω γὰρ καὶ ἐγκατάσκευος ἔσται καὶ ἁπλοῦς ἅμα, καὶ 

> > ἴω ε 7, Ν A / > 7 + 4 
ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ἡδύς, καὶ οὔτε μάλα ἰδιωτικός, οὔτε μάλα 

/ “ \ Ν Ν / / 509 
σοφιστικός. τῶν δὲ τὰς πυκνὰς περιόδους λεγόντων οὐὸ 

ε \ ε ΄ ε a ε . ἃ a > ΄ o, 
al κεφαλαὶ ῥᾳδίως ἑστᾶσιν, ws ἐπὶ τῶν οἰνωμένων, οἵ 

5 4 Qn Ν Ν > / Ν Ν Ν 3 
τε ἀκούοντες ναυτιῶσι διὰ τὸ ἀπίθανον, τοτὲ δὲ καὶ ἐκφω- 
νοῦσι τὰ τέλη τῶν περιόδων προειδότες καὶ προαναβοῶσι. 
16. Τῶν δὲ περιόδων αἱ μικρότεραι μὲν ἐκ δυοῖν 

4 4 ε 2 \ > /) Ν 3 
κώλοιν συντίθενται, αἱ μέγισται δὲ ἐκ τεττάρων: τὸ ὃ 
ὑπὲρ τέτταρα οὐκέτ᾽ ἂν ἐντὸς εἴη περιοδικῆς συμμετρίας. 

΄ Ν Ν ΄ὔ / Ν / 
17. Τίνονται δὲ καὶ τρίκωλοί τινες: καὶ μονόκωλοι 

, a ἴω ε la) ΄ 4 Ν Ν la 
δέ, ds καλοῦσιν ἁπλᾶς περιόδους. ὅταν yap τὸ κῶλον 
μῆκός τε ἔχῃ καὶ καμπὴν κατὰ τὸ τέλος, τότε μονόκωλος 
περίοδος γίνεται, καθάπερ ἡ τοιάδε, “Ἡροδότου ᾿Αλικαρ- 

an ε ΄, ey, Ψ ? \ ΄ ct δ \ 
νασῆος ἱστορίης ἀπόδεξις ἥδε. Kal πάλιν, “ἡ yap σαφὴς 
φράσις πολὺ φῶς παρέχεται ταῖς τῶν ἀκουόντων διανοίαις." 

ε > 5 A / / ε ε A 4 \ «ε Ν 
ὑπ᾽ ἀμφοῖν μέντοι συνίσταται ἡ ἁπλῆ περίοδος, καὶ ὑπὸ 
τοῦ μήκους καὶ ὑπὸ τῆς καμπῆς τῆς περὶ τὸ τέλος, ὑπὸ δὲ 
θατέρου οὐδέ ποτε. 

18. Ἔν δὲ ταῖς συνθέτοις περιόδοις τὸ τελευταῖον 
κῶλον μακρότερον χρὴ εἶναι, καὶ ὥσπερ περιέχον καὶ 
κ᾿ » σ \ \ » \ 
περιειληφὸς τάλλα. οὕτω yap μεγαλοπρεπὴς ἐσται καὶ 


I διερριμένοις P. | πλησίων P. 5 ἐδοκει ex ἐδοκη P. 9 ὁ Γοργίου, ὁ 
supra versum scripto P. 13 δὲ] Schneiderus, τε P. 14, 15 of Te ex οἵστε P. 
15 τότὲ P. 19 ἐντὸς ex ἐκτὸς P. 20 σημείωσαι οἷον μονόκωλος in 


margine P. 22 ἔχει P. 


227 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 77 


vaulted roof. The members of the disconnected style re- 
semble stones which are simply flung carelessly together and 
not built into a structure. 

14. Consequently there is something polished and clean- 
cut in the older method of writing. It resembles ancient 
statues, the art of which was held to consist in their severe 
simplicity. The style of later writers is like the sculpture 
of Pheidias, since it already exhibits in some degree the 
union of elevation and finish. 

15. My own view is that composition should neither, 
like that of Gorgias, consist wholly of a string of periods, nor 
be wholly disconnected like the ancient writings, but should 
rather combine the two methods. It will then be elaborate 
and simple at the same time, and possess the charm of both 
manners, being neither too untutored nor too artificial. Public 
speakers who employ accumulated periods are as giddy-pated 
as tipsy men, and their hearers are sickened by the idle trick ; 
sometimes, indeed, they audibly anticipate the conclusions of 
the orator’s periods and declaim them in advance. 

16. The shorter periods consist of two members, the 
longest of four. Anything beyond four would trespass be- 
yond the symmetry of the period. 

17. There are also periods composed of three members ; 
and others consisting of a single member, which are called 
‘simple’ periods. Every member which possesses the 
requisite length and is rounded at the end forms a single- 
membered period. For example: ‘Herodotus of Halicar- 
nassus sets forth in this History the result of his inquiries’, 
Again: ‘Clear expression floods with light the hearer’s mind?’ 
For the simple period these are the two essentials, the length 
of the member and its final rounding. If either of these con- 
ditions be wanting, there is no period. 

18. In composite periods the last member should be 
longer than the rest, and should as it were contain and 
embrace them all. When the concluding member is long 


1 Herod. i. 1 init. 2 Scr. Inc. 


78 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


Ν la 
σεμνὴ περίοδος, εἰς σεμνὸν καὶ μακρὸν λήγουσα κῶλον' 
5 Ν “ 
εἰ δὲ μή, ἀποκεκομμένη καὶ χωλῇ ὁμοία. παράδειγμα δ᾽ 
5 ia} Ν la) € > Ν Ν 5 ~ ἴω , > Ν 
αὑτῆς τὸ τοιοῦτον, “οὐ γὰρ τὸ εἰπεῖν καλῶς καλόν, ἀλλὰ 
τὸ εἰπόντα δρᾶσαι τὰ εἰρημένα. 
5 19. Τρία δὲ γένη περιόδων ἐστίν, ἱστορική, διαλο- 
γική, ῥητορική. ἱστορικὴ μὲν ἡ μήτε περιηγμένη, μήτ᾽ 
5 4 / 5 Ν Ν 5 “nw ε / ε Ν 
ἀνειμένη σφόδρα, ἀλλὰ μεταξὺ ἀμφοῖν, ὡς μήτε ῥητορικὴ 
δόξειεν καὶ ἀπίθανος διὰ τὴν περιαγωγήν, τὸ σεμνόν 
τε ἔχουσα καὶ ἱστορικὸν ἐκ τῆς ἁπλότητος, οἷον ἡ τοιάδε, 
το “Δαρείου καὶ Παρυσάτιδος γίγνονται᾽ μέχρι τοῦ “νεώτερος 
Ν an ? € /, “2 Ἂ 19 ἴων 4 » 
δὲ Κῦρος. ἑδραίᾳ γάρ τινι καὶ ἀσφαλεῖ καταλήξει ἔοικεν 
αὐτῆς ἡ ἀπόθεσις. 
20. Τῆς δὲ ῥητορικῆς περιόδου συνεστραμμένον τὸ 
εἶδος καὶ κυκλικὸν καὶ δεόμενον στρογγύλου στόματος 
15 Καὶ χειρὸς συμπεριαγομένης τῷ ῥυθμῷ, οἷον τῆς “μάλιστα 
\ C4 la / la how / 4 Ν 
μὲν εἵνεκα τοῦ νομίζειν συμφέρειν TH πόλει λελύσθαι τὸν 
νόμον, εἶτα καὶ τοῦ παιδὸς εἵνεκα τοῦ Χαβρίου,  ὡμολό- 
γησα τούτοις, ὡς ἂν οἷός τε ὦ, συνερεῖν. σχεδὸν γὰρ 
εὐθὺς ἐκ τῆς ἀρχῆς ἡ περίοδος ἡ τοιάδε συνεστραμμένον τι 
» Ἂ 3 “ ν 5 “Δ 5 , > ε “ a 
20 EXEL καὶ ἐμφαῖνον, OTL οὐκ ἂν ἀπολήξειεν εἰς ἁπλοῦν τέλος. 
Ν / > / ε y 5 / Ν 
21. Διαλογικὴ δέ ἐστι περίοδος N ETL ἀνειμενὴ και 
ἁπλουστέρα τῆς ἱστορικῆς, καὶ μόλις ἐμφαίνουσα, ὅτι 
, , 5) τ ε (ὃ « / \ > Ν 
περίοδός ἐστιν, ὥσπερ ἡ τοιάδε, “κατέβην χθὲς εἰς τὸν 
“ los 4 la nan > 
Πειραιᾶ᾿ μέχρι Tov “ἅτε νῦν πρῶτον ἄγοντες. ἐπέρριπται 
Ν 5 ΄ Ν a QD Gf 4 ν 3 aA 
25 γὰρ ἀλλήλοις τὰ κῶλα ἐφ ἑτέρῳ ETEPOV, WOTTEP ἐν τοῖς 
ὃ Ya / \ > Z / a > θ fos 
ιαλελυμένοις λόγοις, καὶ ἀπολήξαντες μόλις av ἐννοη θεῖ- 
Ν Ν ΄ ν Ν / / ὃ > ὃ lay 
μεν κατὰ TO τέλος, OTL TO λεγόμενον περίοδος ἣν. δεῖ 
γὰρ μεταξὺ διῃρημένης τε καὶ κατεστραμμένης λέξεως 
τὴν διαλογικὴν περίοδον γράφεσθαι, καὶ μεμιγμένην 
30 ὁμοίαν ἀμφοτέροις. περιόδων μὲν εἴδη τοσάδε. 


2 εἰ εχ 7 (ἡ punctis notato) P. ἀποκεκομμένη Kal χωλῆι P. 4 δράσαι P. 
5 σὴ ὅτι τρία γένη περιόδων in margine P. 10 γίγνωνται P. μέχρη (η punctis 
notato) P. II κῦρκος cum litura P. ἐδραίαν corr. in ἑδραίαι P. ἔοικε P. 
12 ἀπόθεσης (ny punctis notato) P. 15 περιαγομένης. (superscripto συμ) P. 
16 τοῦ] codd. Demosth., τὸ P (cp. p. 72 1. 23 supra). 21 ἀνειμένη 
(η in rasura) P. 22 ἱστορικῆς] Victorius, ῥητορικῆς P. 25 ἑτέρῳ] edd., 
ἑκατέρω P. 26 ἐννοηθεῖμεν) Spengelius, ἐννοηθῶμεν P. 28 καὶ καὶ (alterum 


καὶ in compend.) P. 


228° 


DEMETRIGS ON ST VLE 79 


and stately, the period itself will be stately and impressive ; 
otherwise it will be broken and as it were halting. The 
following is an instance of the period here recommended: 
‘True grandeur consists not in saying grand things, but in 
doing things said, after saying them’? 

19. There are three kinds of period: the historical, the 
conversational, the rhetorical. The historical period should 
be neither too rounded, nor yet too relaxed, but between the 
two; so framed that it does not seem rhetorical and uncon- 
vincing through its rounded form, but draws its dignity and 
power of exposition from its simplicity. An instance of such 
a period is furnished by the words ‘Darius and Parysatis’ 
down to ‘the younger Cyrus?.’ The cadence of the period 
here resembles a sure and well-based termination. 

20. The form of the rhetorical period is close-knit and 
circular; it needs an ample utterance and a gesture which 
corresponds to the movements of the rhythm. For example: 
‘Chiefly because I thought it was to the interest of the State 
that the law should be abrogated, but also for the sake of 
Chabrias’ boy, I have agreed to plead, to the best of my 
ability, my clients’ case*. From the very outset such a 
period contains something compact—something which clearly 
intimates that it will not come to a simple ending. 

21. The period of dialogue is one which remains lax, and 
is also simpler than the historical. It scarcely betrays the fact 
that it is a period. For instance: ‘I went down yesterday to 
the Peiraeus’ as far as the words ‘since they were now 
celebrating it for the first time*’ The members are flung 
one upon another as in the disjointed style, and when we 
reach the end we can hardly realise that the words formed 
a period. For the period used in dialogue should be a form 
of writing midway between the resolved and the compacted 
style, and compounded of both in equal measure.—Such are 
the different kinds of period. 


is S crs ine: 2 Xen. Anad. i. τ: cp. ὃ 3 supra. 


3. Dem. Zeft., init.: cp. ὃ τὸ supra. 
4 Plat. Rep. i. τ, κατέβην χθὲς els Πειραιᾶ μετὰ Τἱλαύκωνος τοῦ ᾿Αρίστωνος προσ- 
εὐξόμενός τε τῇ θεῷ καὶ ἅμα τὴν ἑορτὴν βουλόμενος θεάσασθαι τίνα τρόπον ποιήσουσιν 


ἅτε νῦν πρῶτον ἄγοντες. 


80 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


22. Τίνονται δὲ καὶ ἐξ ἀντικειμένων κώλων περίοδοι, 
ἀντικειμένων δὲ ἤτοι τοῖς πράγμασιν, οἷον “πλέων μὲν 
ὃ Ν ων 5 / ͵ὕ Ν Ν lan , 7xnr 3 ΄,ὕ 

La τῆς ἠπείρου, πεζεύων δὲ διὰ τῆς θαλάσσης, ἢ ἀμφοτέ- 
pou, Τῇ τε λέξει καὶ τοῖς πράγμασιν, ὥσπερ ἡ αὐτὴ 


σι 


7 ae »» 
περίοδος ὧδε ἔχει. 
23. Κατὰ δὲ τὰ ὀνόματα μόνον ἀντικείμενα κῶλα 
΄ὕ 9 ΄ a ε ε N ε ΄ \ a 
τοιάδε ἐστίν, οἷον ὡς ὃ τὴν λένην παραβαλὼν τῷ 
ε wn ν « “ Ἂν, > / Ν / 
Ηρακλεῖ φησιν, ὅτι “τῷ μὲν ἐπίπονον καὶ πολυκίνδυνον 
Ἂν 4 5 / wn Ν / Ν ’ὔ’ Ν 
τὸν βίον ἐποίησεν, τῆς δὲ περίβλεπτον καὶ περιμάχητον τὴν 
10 φύσιν κατέστησεν. ἀντίκειται γὰρ καὶ ἄρθρον ἄρθρῳ, 
Ν /, » Ψ ε ΄ὔ \ + ἊΝ Ν 
καὶ σύνδεσμος συνδέσμῳ, ὅμοια ὁμοίοις, καὶ τάλλα δὲ κατὰ 
τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον, τῷ μὲν “ἐποίησεν᾽ τὸ “κατέστησεν, τῷ 
δὲ “ἐπίπονον᾽ τὸ “ περίβλεπτον, τῷ δὲ “ πολυκίνδυνον᾽ τὸ 
ς , ? WG ἃ N Y ν 6}... ε 
περιμάχητον, καὶ ὅλως ἕν πρὸς EV, ὅμοιον Tap ὅμοιον, ἢ 
ἀνταπόδοσις. 
3, la \ 
24. Ἔστι δὲ κῶλα, ἃ μὴ ἀντικείμενα ἐμφαίνει τινὰ 
ὰ (θ ὃ Ν Ν A 4 5 θ ΄ pO 0 4 
ντίθεσιν διὰ τὸ τῷ σχήματι ἀντιθέτως γεγράφθαι, καθά- 
an a ν 
περ τὸ Tap ᾿πκαιχάρμῳ τῷ ποιητῇ πεπαιγμένον, ὅτι “τόκα 
> ? 
μὲν ἐν τήνοις ἐγὼν ἦν, τόκα δὲ παρὰ THVOLS ἐγών. TO 


μι 
σι 


20 αὐτὸ μὲν γὰρ εἴρηται, καὶ οὐδὲν ἐναντίον: ὁ δὲ τρόπος 
τῆς ἑρμηνείας μεμιμημένος ἀντίθεσίν τινα πλανῶντι ἔοικεν. 
ἀλλ᾽ οὗτος μὲν ἴσως γελωτοποιῶν οὕτως ἀντέθηκεν, καὶ 
ἅμα σκώπτων τοὺς ῥήτορας. 

25. Ἔστι δὲ καὶ παρόμοια κῶλα, ἅτινα παρόμοια δὴ 


τοῖς ἐπ᾿ ἀρχῆς, οἷον 


τὸ 
σι 


δωρητοί τε πέλοντο, παράρητοί T ἐπέεσσιν' 
cA Ὁ 2) / ε ε an A 9 δες ΄ 
ἢ ὡς ἐπὶ τέλους, ὡς ἡ τοῦ Πανηγυρικοῦ ἀρχή, “πολλάκις 
“ / Ν Ν 
ἐθαύμασα τῶν τὰς πανηγύρεις συναγαγόντων καὶ τοὺς 
an ’ ? 5 Ν lal 
γυμνικοὺς ἀγῶνας καταστησάντων. εἶδος δὲ τοῦ παρο- 
, ἊΝ > / 5 Ν y+ y Ν “ ἊΝ 7) 
30 μοίου τὸ ἰσόκωλον, ἐπὰν ἴσας ἔχῃ τὰ κῶλα τὰς συλλαβας, 
2, 3 πλεῦσαι... πεζεῦσαι codd. Isocratis. IL ὅμοια ὁμοίοις ex ὁμοία ὅμοιος P. 
12, 13 τὸ ubique, nusquam τῷ P. 19 παρητήνοις P. 19, 20 τὸ αὐτὸ 
apogr.: αὐτὸ P. 21 μεμιμημένος] Muretus, μεμιγμένος P. 22 γελωποιῶν 


(το supra versum addito) P. 24 περὶ παρομοίων κώλων titulus in P. 25 Ounpos 
in margine P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 81 


22. Periods can also be formed of contrasted members. 
The antithesis may lie in the thought, e.g. ‘sailing across the 
mainland and marching across the sea’” Or it may be 
twofold, of thought and of expression, as in this same 
period. 

23. Members which are only verbally contrasted may 
be illustrated by the comparison drawn between Helen and 
Hercules: ‘to the man he gave a laborious and perilous life, 
while he caused the woman’s beauty to be admired and 
coveted®’ Here article is opposed to article, connective to 
connective, like to like, from the beginning to the end: 
‘caused’ to ‘gave, ‘admired’ to ‘laborious,’ ‘coveted’ to 
‘perilous.’ The correspondence of one thing with another, 
of like with like, runs throughout. 

24. There are some members which, although not really 
opposed to one another, are apparently antithetical owing to 
the antithetic form in which they are written. Such is the 
pleasantry of the poet Epicharmus: ‘One time in their midst 
was I, another time beside them I*’ A single thought is 
here expressed, and there is no real opposition. But the turn 
of the phrase, which apes an antithesis, suggests a desire to 
mislead. Probably the poet employed the antithesis by way 
of jest, and also in mockery of the rhetoricians. 

25. There are also symmetrical members. Among these 
the symmetry may be found at the beginning, e.g. 


Yet might they by presents be won, and by pleadings be 
pacified*: 
or at the end, as in the opening passage of the ‘ Panegyric’: 
‘I have often wondered at the conduct of the men who con- 
vened the assemblies and instituted the gymnastic contests*’ 
Under the heading of symmetry of members comes equality 
of members, which occurs when the members contain an 


1 Tsocr. Panegyr. 58 E, ὥστε τῷ στρατοπέδῳ πλεῦσαι μὲν διὰ τῆς ἠπείρου, πεζεῦσαι 
δὲ διὰ τῆς θαλάττης, τὸν μὲν Ἑλλήσποντον ζεύξας, τὸν δ᾽ Αθω διορύξας. 

2 Tsocr. Enc. Hel. 17. 

3 Epich. Fragm. 147, G. Kaibel C. G. 2. 

4 Hom. 72. ix. 526. 

° Tsocr. Panegyr. 1. 


R. 6 


82 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


C2 διὸ ΩΣ » > , ΕῚ , 
ὥσπερ Θουκυδίδῃ, ‘ws οὔτε ὧν πυνθάνονται ἀπαξιούντων 
ἊΣ » - 5 A » > 4 5 > / 9 
TO ἔργον, ols τε ἐπιμελὲς εἴη εἰδέναι οὐκ ὀνειδιζόντων᾽" 
ἰσόκωλον μὲν δὴ τοῦτο." 
26. ὋὉμοιοτέλευτα δέ ἐστι τὰ εἰς ὅμοια καταλήγοντα, 
μ Wy 
» 5 3 , 5 ’ὔὕ ν "» 3 \ ον Ν 3 5 Ν 
5 ἤτοι εἰς ὀνόματα ταὐτά, ὥσπερ ἔχει ἐπὶ τοῦ ‘ov δ᾽ αὐτὸν 
καὶ ζῶντα ἔλεγες κακῶς, καὶ νῦν θανόντα γράφεις κακῶς" 228" 
ΕΥ͂ ν 5 A ͵ὕ Ν > ᾽ὕ ν Ν 
ἢ ὅταν εἰς συλλαβὴν καταλήγῃ τὴν αὐτήν, ὥσπερ τὰ 
ἐκ τοῦ ἸΠανηγυρικοῦ προειρημένα. 
27. Χρῆσις δὲ τῶν τοιούτων κώλων ἐπισφαλής. οὔτε 
Ν ὃ lal ΄ 5 “ὃ > , Ν Ν ,ὕ 
το γὰρ δεινῶς λέγοντι ἐπιτήδεια: ἐκλύει γὰρ τὴν δεινότητα 
e Ν > Ν θ / ἈΝ ͵ὕ on > ε ἴων ἴω 
ἡ περὶ αὐτὰ τερθρεία καὶ φροντίς. δῆλον δ᾽ ἡμῖν τοῦτο 
ποιεῖ Θεόπομπος. κατηγορῶν γὰρ τῶν Φιλίππου φίλων 
φησίν, “ἀνδροφόνοι δὲ τὴν φύσιν ὄντες, ἀνδροπόρνοι τὸν 
τρόπον ἦσαν" καὶ ἐκαλοῦντο μὲν ἑταῖροι, ἦσαν δὲ ἑταῖραι.᾽ 
e Ν ε ,ὔ ε Ν ΝΑ lal Ν 5 4 > 4 Ν 
151) γὰρ ὁμοιότης ἡ περὶ τὰ κῶλα καὶ ἀντίθεσις ἐκλύει τὴν 
δεινότητα διὰ τὴν κακοτεχνίαν. θυμὸς γὰρ τέχνης οὐ 
lal 3 Ν la ΄, Ν 5 lal > 5 Ν lo 
δεῖται, ἀλλὰ δεῖ τρόπον τινὰ αὐτοφυᾶ εἶναι ἐπὶ τῶν 
τοιούτων κατηγοριῶν καὶ ἁπλᾶ τὰ λεγόμενα. 
» la) > / ,’ Ν lal ε 
28. Οὔτε δῆτα ἐν δεινότητι χρήσιμα τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὡς 
ἔὃ » 5 (0 Ν 70 ὃ ε λ la) \ > 
20 ἔδειξα, οὔτε ἐν πάθεσι καὶ ἤθεσιν: ἁπλοῦν yap εἶναι 
΄ Ἂν IS. ΄ὕ \ 6 ε ΄ὕἹ : δὲ \ N 50 
βούλεται καὶ ἀποίητον τὸ πάθος, ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ τὸ ἦθος. 
3 A n°? ΄ \ , ε Noy? 
ἐν γοῦν τοῖς Αριστοτέλους περὶ δικαιοσύνης ὁ τὴν ᾿Αθη- 
ναίων πόλιν ὀδυρόμενος εἰ μὲν οὕτως εἴποι ὅτι “ποίαν 
΄ ΄ aN a 5) θ la 2 Ν ἰδί aN 
τοιαύτην πόλιν εἷλον τῶν ἐχθρῶν, οἵαν THY ἰδίαν πόλιν 
᾽ , »> 93 θῶ “Ὁ 3 Ν » Ν δὸ PN 3 δὲ 
on ἀπώλεσαν, ἐμπαθῶς ἂν εἰρηκὼς εἴη καὶ ὀδυρτικῶς" εἰ δὲ 
παρόμοιον αὐτὸ ποιήσει: “ποίαν γὰρ πόλιν τῶν ἐχθρῶν τοι- 
αύὐτην ἔλαβον, ὁποίαν τὴν ἰδίαν ἀπέβαλον, οὐ μὰ τὸν Δία 
πάθος κινήσει οὐδὲ ἔλεον, ἀλλὰ τὸν καλούμενον κλαυσι- 
γέλωτα. τὸ γὰρ ἐν πενθοῦσι παίζειν, κατὰ τὴν παροι- 


ἴω ἴω ͵7 nr 
30 μίαν, TO τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐν τοῖς πάθεσι κακοτεχνεῖν ἐστι. 


2 οἷς τε] Thucyd., οἷς το P. 4 περὶ ὁμοιοτελεύτων titulusin P. 5 Tatra P. 
το ἐπιτήδεια: a supra versum add. m. rec. P. 13 ἀνδρόπόρνοι P. 16 on 
in margine P. 19, 20 ws ἔδειξα in margine add. P. 25 ἀπώλεσαν supra 
versum addidit P. 27 ἀπέβαλον: Bin ras. P. | μὰ τὸν Ala: τὴν ἀλήθειαν 


in margine P. 29 παροιμία in margine P. 


DEMETRIOS ON ST VLE 83 


equal number of syllables, as in the following sentence of 
Thucydides: ‘This implies that neither those who are asked 
disown, nor those who care to know censure the occupation’, 
This is an instance of equality of members. 

26. ‘Homoeoteleuta’ are members which have a similar 
termination. They may end with the same word, as in the 
sentence: ‘You are the man who, when he was alive, spoke 
to his discredit, and now that he is dead write to his discredit’: 
or they may end with the same syllable, as in the passage 
already quoted from the ‘ Panegyric’ of Isocrates. 

ΟἿ. The use of this kind of members is not free from 
risk. They are ill-suited for vigorous declamation, since the 
artifice and study which they involve impairs the energy of 
discourse. Theopompus proves our point when, in arraigning 
the friends of Philip, he exclaims: ‘Men-slayers in nature, 
they were men-harlots in life; they were called comrades, 
but were concubines*” The similarity in the members, and 
the antithesis between them, impairs the vigour of the expres- 
sion through the trick of art. For indignation needs no art; 
in such invectives the words should be simple and, in a 
manner, impromptu. 

28. Such devices, as I have shown, do not contribute to 
vigour of style. They are not appropriate to outbursts of 
passion, or to delineations of character. Simplicity and 
naturalness is the mark alike of passion and of character- 
drawing. In the treatise of Aristotle ‘On Justice,’ for instance, 
a speaker laments the fate of Athens. If he asks ‘what city 
had they taken from their enemies as great as their own city 
which they had destroyed*, he will have spoken with feeling 
and from the heart. But if he makes the members of the 
sentence symmetrical: ‘what so great city from their enemies 
had they taken as their own city which they had forsaken, 
you may depend upon it that he will not excite pity or com- 
passion, but rather the so-called ‘mirth amid tears.’ For 
ill-judged ingenuity of this kind in emotional passages is no 
better than the proverbial ‘jest at a funeral.’ 


1 Thucyd. i. 5. 2 Scr. Inc.: ep. Aristot. Afez. 111. 9. 
3 Theopomp. fragm. 249, Miiller, 7. H. G. τ. p. 320. 
* Aristot. Fragm. 71, ed. Berol. v. p. 1487. 


6—2 


84 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


7 

29. Τίνεται μέντοι ye χρήσιμά ποτε, ws ᾿Αριστοτέλης 

͵ὕ oe) Ν 5 Ν > θ nan 5 πὶ , > ἊΝ Ν 
φησίν, “ἐγὼ ἐκ μὲν ᾿Αθηνῶν εἰς Στάγειρα ἦλθον διὰ τὸν 

, Ν / > δὲ ys / 5 3 ᾽ὔὕ Ν Ν 
βασιλέα τὸν μέγαν, ἐκ δὲ Σταγείρων εἰς ᾿Αθήνας διὰ τὸν 
χειμῶνα τὸν μέγαν" εἰ γοῦν ἀφέλοις τὸ ἕτερον “μέγαν, 

Ν Ν “ 

δ συναφαιρήσῃ καὶ τὴν χάριν: τῇ γὰρ μεγαληγορίᾳ συνερ- 
yot ἂν τὰ τοιαῦτα κῶλα, ὁποῖα τῶν Γοργίου τὰ πολλὰ 
ἀντίθετα καὶ τῶν ᾿Ισοκράτους. περὶ μὲν δὴ τῶν παρο- 
μοίων ταῦτα. 

4 Ν 5 7, ᾽ὔ “A 4 ε Ν 
30. Διαφέρει δὲ ἐνθύμημα περιόδου τῇδε, OTL ἢ μεν 
4 7 7 > 4 5 3 ΩΝ Ν 5 / 
10 περίοδος σύνθεσις Tis ἐστι περιηγμένη, ad ἧς Kal ὠνό- 
μασται, τὸ δὲ ἐνθύμημα ἐν τῷ διανοήματι ἔχει τὴν δύναμιν 
N 2 Ν an 
Kal σύστασιν: καὶ ἔστιν ἡ μὲν περίοδος κύκλος τοῦ ἐνθυ- 
4 ν Ν “ + ’ὔ’ Ν δ᾽ 5 , 
μήματος, ὥσπερ Kal τῶν ἀλλων πραγμάτων, TO ἐνθύ- 
/, / »» > / / EN 5 5 / 
μημα διάνοιά Tus ἤτοι ἐκ μάχης λεγομένη ἢ ἐν ἀκολουθίας 
15 σχήματι. 
31. Σημεῖον δέ: εἰ γὰρ διαλύσειας τὴν σύνθεσιν τοῦ 
> , \ \ , 3 , N >» > , 
ἐνθυμήματος, τὴν μὲν περίοδον ἠφάνισας, τὸ δ᾽ ἐνθύμημα 
ταὐτὸν μένει, οἷον εἴ τις τὸ παρὰ Δημοσθένει διαλύσειεν 
ἐνθύμημα τὸ τοιοῦτον, “ὥσπερ γὰρ εἴ τις ἐκείνων ἑάλω, 
\ Aw) 9 Ἃ » Ὁ EN \ ἮΝ ε aA » 
2000 TAO οὐκ ἂν ἔγραψας: οὕτως ἂν σὺ νῦν ἁλῷς, ἄλλος 
> / ) ὃ 7 δὲ 4 « Ν > / an Ν 
οὐ γράψει᾽ διαλύσειεν δὲ οὕτω: “μὴ ἐπιτρέπετε τοῖς τὰ 
παράνομα γράφουσιν: εἰ γὰρ ἐκωλύοντο, οὐκ ἂν νῦν οὗτος 
n A 539) Y » , 7, la) ε / ) 
ταῦτα ἔγραφεν, οὐδ᾽ ἕτερος ἔτι γράψει τούτου νῦν ἁλόντος: 
5 los an ,ὔ Ν ε ΄ὔ 5 7) Ν > > 
ἐνταῦθα τῆς περιόδου μὲν ὁ κύκλος ἐκλέλυται, TO δ᾽ ἐν- 
᾽ὔ > 5 los 4 

25 θύμημα ἐν ταὐτῷ μένει. 

32. Καὶ καθόλου δὲ τὸ μὲν ἐνθύμημα συλλογισμός 
΄ὔ 5 ε / ε / ὃ ὃ Ν ΄ὔ \ >) / 
Tis ἐστι PNTOPLKOS, ἢ περίοδος δὲ συλλογίζεται μὲν οὐδέν, 
σύγκειται δὲ μόνον: καὶ περιόδους μὲν ἐν παντὶ μέρει 
τοῦ λόγου τίθεμεν, οἷον ἐν τοῖς προοιμίοις, ἐνθυμήματα 


\ > 3 , Ν Ν Ν ν > 4 Ν > 4 
30 δὲ ουκ ἐν TQAVTL’ Καὶ TO μὲν WOTTEP ἐπιλέγεται, TO ev Ov- 


2 στάγηρα P. 4 τὸ ἕτερον μέγα P: corr. edd. 5:6 συνεργοῖ ἂν] 
Goellerus, συνεργοῖεν Ῥ. 9 τίνι διαφέρει ἐνθύμημα περιόδου titulus in P. 
Io on τὴν διαφορὰν in margine P. 13, 14 τί ἐστιν ἐνθύμημα in margine P. | 


14 7 addidit Finckhius. 23 ἁλῶντος Ρ. 


229" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 85 


29. There are, however, cases in which symmetry of 
members is useful, as in the following passage of Aristotle: 
‘I went from Athens to Stageira because of the great king, 
and from Stageira to Athens because of the great storm’” If 
you take away the word ‘great’ in either case, you will at the 
same time destroy the charm. The reason is that such mem- 
bers, like the many antithetical ones of Gorgias and Isocrates, 
tend to heighten expression —Thus much, then, with regard 
to symmetrical members. 

30. The ‘enthymeme’ differs from the period in the 
fact that the latter is a rounded structure, from which indeed 
it derives its name; while the former finds its meaning and 
existence in the thought. The period comprehends the en- 
thymeme in the same way as other subject-matter. The 
enthymeme is a thought expressed either controversially or 
consequentially. 

31. A word in proof. If you break up the structure of 
the enthymeme, you destroy the period, but the enthymeme 
remains intact. Suppose, for instance, the following enthy- 
meme in Demosthenes to be broken up: ‘Just as you would 
not have made this proposal if any of the former parties had 
been convicted, so if you are convicted now no one will 
do so in future?’ Let the enthymeme run thus: ‘Show 
no indulgence to those who make illegal proposals; for if 
they were habitually checked, the defendant would not be 
making these proposals now, nor will anyone in future 
make them if he is convicted now.’ Here the round of the 
period has been destroyed, but the enthymeme remains where 
it was. 

32. In general, the enthymeme is a kind of rhetorical 
syllogism, while the period is not reasoning at all, but 
simply a combination of words. Nor is this the only 
point of distinction. We use periods in every part of the 
discourse, for example in exordiums; but we do not so use 
enthymemes. The one—the enthymeme—is as it were an 


1 Aristot. Fragm. 619, ed. Berol. v. p. 1582. 
2 Demosth. Av7stocr. 99. 


86 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


ε 4 Ν 5 / 72 Ν Ν Ν “Ὁ 
μήημα, ἡ περίοδος δὲ αὐτόθεν λέγεται: καὶ τὸ μὲν οἷον 
Yi 5) 3 ΄ ε δ x y » > \ 
συλλογισμός ἐστιν ἀτελής, ἡ δὲ οὔτε ὅλον τι οὔτε ἀτελὲς 
συλλογίζεται. 
Sy 4 Ν > “A =) 4 Ν ’ὔ 
33. Συμβέβηκε μεν οὖν T@ ἐνθυμήματι και περιόδῳ 
- > / “ 4 , > 
5 εἶναι, διότι περιοδικῶς σύγκειται, περίοδος δ᾽ οὐκ ἔστιν, 
ὥσπερ τῷ οἰκοδομουμένῳ συμβέβηκε μὲν καὶ λευκῷ εἶναι, 
x» Ν εν Ν 5 ͵΄ὕ > 5 >» ΄ὔ Ν 
ἂν λευκὸν ἢ, τὸ οἰκοδομούμενον δ᾽ οὐκ ἔστι λευκόν. περὶ 
Ν Ν an 5 4 Ν ὕ 5, 
μὲν δὴ διαφορᾶς ἐνθυμήματος καὶ περιόδου εἴρηται. 
34. Τὸ δὲ κῶλον ᾿Αριστοτέλης οὕτως ὁρίζεται, "κῶλόν 
10 ἐστι τὸ ἕτερον μέρος περιόδου" εἶτα ἐπιφέρει: “γίνεται 
δὲ καὶ ἁπλῆ περίοδος. οὕτως ὁρισάμενος, “τὸ ἕτερον 
μέρος, δίκωλον ἐβούλετο εἶναι τὴν περίοδον δηλονότι. 
ὁ δ᾽ ᾿Αρχέδημος, συλλαβὼν τὸν ὅρον τοῦ ᾿Αριστοτέλους 
καὶ τὸ ἐπιφερόμενον τῷ ὅρῳ, σαφέστερον καὶ τελεώτερον 
15 οὕτως ὡρίσατο, “κῶλόν ἐστιν ἤτοι ἁπλῆ περίοδος, 7 
συνθέτου περιόδου μέρος." 
35. Τί μὲν οὖν ἁπλῆ περίοδος, εἴρηται: συνθέτου δὲ 
4 5 Ν ,ὔ, 4 > Ν i? Ἂν , 
φήσας αὐτὸ περιόδου μέρος, οὐ δυσὶ κώλοις τὴν περίο- 
ε , 4 > Ν ἣν \ Ν ,] ε “ 
δον ὁρίζειν ἔοικεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τρισὶ καὶ πλείοσιν: ἡμεῖς 
\ 4 Ν , > / nw A Ν Lal 
2. δὲ μέτρον μὲν περιόδου ἐκτεθείμεθα, νῦν δὲ περὶ τῶν 


χαρακτήρων τῆς ἑρμηνείας λέγωμεν. 


ΠῚ 


5 Ν Ν 4 ε ε »“ “Δ 5 Lp 

36. Εἰσὶ δὲ τέτταρες οἱ ἁπλοῖ χαρακτῆρες, ἰσχνός, 
4 , / A Ἂν ε 5 4 

μεγαλοπρεπής, γλαφυρός, δεινός, καὶ λοιπὸν οἱ ἐκ τούτων 

f? / Ν 5 “ / > 9.9 Ν 
μιγνύμενοι. μίγνυνται δὲ οὐ πᾶς παντί, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ γλαφυρὸς 

Lal nw ww ~ Ν 
25 Mev καὶ τῷ ἰσχνῷ καὶ τῷ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ, καὶ ὁ δεινὸς 
\ n nw 
δὲ ὁμοίως ἀμφοτέροις: μόνος δὲ ὁ μεγαλοπρεπὴς τῷ ἰσχνῴ 
5 , 5 5 ν 5 / Ν 3 4, 

ov μίγνυται, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ ἀνθέστατον καὶ ἀντίκεισθον 
9. ὅρος κώλου κατὰ ἀριστοτέλην in margine P. 11 καὶ in litura P. 13 on 
κατὰ ἀρχέδημον ὅρος in margine P. 14 6pw ex ὅλω (ut videtur) P. 21 λέγομεν 
(in litura) P: corr. edd. 22 περὶ χαρακτήρων titulus in P. 24 μηγνύμενοι 


(η punctis notato) P. 26, 27. on ὅτι μόνος ὁ μεγαλοπρεπὴς χαρακτὴρ τῷ ἰσχνῷ 
οὐ μίγνυται in margine P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 87 


additional utterance, while the period is an independent 
utterance. The former may be called an incomplete syl- 
logism, while the latter corresponds to no syllogism, whether 
perfect or incomplete. 

33. It may, indeed, happen that an enthymeme is at the 
same time a period because its construction is periodic. Still 
it is not identical with the period. A building may be white 
if it so chance, but a building, as such, is not necessarily white. 
—So much for the distinction between enthymeme and period. 

34. The ‘member’ is thus defined by Aristotle: ‘A 
member is one of the two parts of a period.’ He then adds: 
‘A period is also occasionally simple'’ The reference in his 
definition to ‘one of the two parts’ makes it clear that he 
preferred the period to have two members. Archedemus, 
combining the definition of Aristotle and its supplement, 
produced a clearer and fuller definition of his own: ‘A mem- 
ber is either a simple period, or part of a compound period?’ 

35. The simple period has been already described. In 
saying that a member may be part of a compound period, 
Arehedemus seems not to confine the period to two members, 
but to include three or a greater number.—We have given 
our views concerning the limits of the period; let us now 
describe the types of style. 


CAs Rane 


36. The simple types of style are four in number: the 
‘plain, the ‘elevated, the ‘elegant, the ‘forcible.’ In addi- 
tion there are the various combinations of these types. Not 
every style, however, can be combined with every other. The 
elegant is found united with the plain and the elevated, and 
the forcible with both alike. The elevated and the plain 
alone cannot be compounded. They are so irreconcilably 

1 Aristot. het. iii. 9, περίοδος δὲ ἡ μὲν ἐν κώλοις ἡ δ᾽ ἀφελής... κῶλον δ᾽ ἐστὶν 


τὸ ἕτερον μόριον ταύτης. ἀφελῆ δὲ λέγω τὴν μονόκωλον. 
2 Archedem. Fragm. 


5 


Io 


15 


88 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


> ἐπ Ν Ν Ν / "2 an 4 
ἐναντιωτάτω. διὸ δὴ Kal μόνους δύο χαρακτῆράς τινες 
3 “A > 4 Ν Ν Ν 4 Ν / 
ἀξιοῦσιν εἶναι τούτους, τοὺς δὲ λοιποὺς δύο μετα ξὺ τούτων, 
τὸν μὲν γλαφυρὸν τῷ ἰσχνῷ προσνέμοντες μᾶλλον, τῷ 
δὲ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ τὸν δεινόν, ὡς τοῦ γλαφυροῦ μὲν μικρό- 
τητά τινα καὶ κομψείαν ἔχοντος, τοῦ δεινοῦ δὲ ὄγκον καὶ 
μέγεθος. 

37. Τελοῖος δ᾽ ὁ τοιοῦτος λόγος. ὁρῶμεν γὰρ πλὴν 
τῶν εἰρημένων χαρακτήρων ἐναντίων, πάντας μιγνυμένους 
πᾶσιν, οἷον τὰ “Ομήρου τε ἔπη καὶ τοὺς Πλάτωνος λόγους 
καὶ Ἐενοφῶντος καὶ Ἡροδότου καὶ ἄλλων πολλῶν πολλὴν 
μὲν μεγαλοπρέπειαν καταμεμιγμένην ἔχοντας, πολλὴν δὲ 
δεινότητά τε καὶ χάριν, ὥστε τὸ μὲν πλῆθος τῶν χαρακ- 
τήρων τοσοῦτον ἂν εἴη, ὅσον λέλεκται. ἑρμηνεία δ᾽ 
ἑκάστῳ πρέπουσα γένοιτ᾽ ἂν τοιάδε τις. 

38. [Αρξομαι δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ μεγαλοπρεποῦς, ὄνπερ νῦν 
λόγιον ὀνομάζουσιν. ἐν τρισὶ δὴ τὸ μεγαλοπρεπές, δια- 

/ ᾽ὔ a an / 4 Ν 
νοίᾳ, λέξει, τῷ συγκεῖσθαι προσφόρως. σύνθεσις δὲ 
4 ν 9 i? ε / 
μεγαλοπρεπής, ws φησιν ᾿Αριστοτέλης, ἢ παιωνική. 
παίωνος δὲ εἴδη δύο, τὸ μὲν προκαταρκτικόν, οὗ ἄρχει 


Ν / / \ A A -“ \ / 
20 μεν PaKkpa, λήγουσι δὲ TPels βραχεῖαι, OLOV TO TOLOVOE, 


25 


a, viv νυ /, 
“ηρξατὸ de, τὸ δὲ καταληκτικὸν θατέρῳ ἀντίστροφον, 
na an “ > /, Ἅ 
οὗ τρεῖς μὲν βραχεῖαι ἄρχουσιν, λήγει δὲ μία μακρά, 
ν \ Upv=? 
ὥσπερ τὸ ‘ ApaBia. 
nw nw Lal ἴω / 
39. Δεῖ δὲ ἐν τοῖς κώλοις τοῦ μεγαλοπρεποῦς λόγου 
» na \ 
TOV TPOKATAPKTLKOV μὲν παίωνα ἄρχειν τῶν κώλων, TOV 
Ν \ & 4 3 5 Lal Ν 
καταληκτικὸν δὲ ἕπεσθαι. παράδειγμα δ᾽ αὐτῶν τὸ Θουκυ- 
Ξ2 ων δ δ v S 2) 2 vu Go 9 , 3 
δίδειον τόδε, “ηρξατὸ δὲ τὸ κακὸν εξ Αἰθιδπϊας. τί ποτ 
> ν an \ \ Ν 
οὖν ᾿Αριστοτέλης οὕτω διετάξατο; ὅτι δεῖ καὶ τὴν ἐμβολὴν 
lal / Ν > \ lal > Ν > Ν ᾽ὔ 
τοῦ κώλου καὶ ἀρχὴν μεγαλοπρεπῆ εὐθὺς εἶναι καὶ τέλος, 
I διὸ] Victorius, de ὁ P. 5 κομψίαν P. 8 εἰρημένων] Victorius, 
ὁρωμένων P. 14 ἑκάστωι P. 15 περὶ μεγαλοπρεποῦς titulus in P. | weyado- 
πρεπὴς in margine P. 18 μεγαλοπρεποὺς P. 19 ὅτι δύο εἴδη παίωνος, παίων 
a’ —~~~, παίων B’ ~~~-— in margine P. 23 τὰ dpaBerd P: corr. Walzius. 
26 θυκυδίδιον P. 27 ἤρξατο P syllaba longa non indicata. 


229° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 89 


opposed and contrasted that some maintain that there are no 
other types of style besides these two, the rest being inter- 
mediate. The elegant style is, thus, regarded as akin to the 
plain, and the forcible as akin to the elevated, as though the 
first contained something slight and dainty, and the second 
something massive and grand. 

87. Such a view is absurd. We can see for ourselves 
that, with the exception of the two opposites just mentioned, 
any style may be combined with any other. In the poetry of 
Homer, for example, as well as in the prose of Plato, Xeno- 
phon, Herodotus and many other writers, great elevation is 
joined to great vigour and charm. The number of types of 
style is, therefore, that already indicated. The mode of 
expression appropriate to each will be found to be of the 
following kind. 

38. I shall begin with the elevated style, to which 
to-day the title ‘eloquent’ is given. Elevation consists in 
three things: ‘thought,’ ‘diction,’ ‘appropriate composition.’ 
According to Aristotle, the paeonic rhythm is elevated’. 
There are two kinds of paeon, the ‘ procatarctic’ (initial), 
beginning with a long ‘syllable and ending with three short 
ones, e.g. ἤρξατο δέ: and the ‘catalectic’ (final), the converse 
of the former, that is to say, beginning with three short 
syllables and ending with a single long one, e.g. ᾿Αραβία. 

39. In the elevated style the members should begin 
with a procatarctic paeon and end with a catalectic paeon, as 
in this passage of Thucydides: ‘ Now it was from Aethiopia 
that the malady originally came”. What, now, is the reason 
why Aristotle advised this arrangement of syllables? Because 


the member should open and end impressively ; and this will 


1 Aristot. Rhet. iii. 8. 2 Thucyd. ii. 48. 


Io 


~ 
σι 


20 


25 


90 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAZ 


wn δ᾽ yy 3k 3 Ν “A 53 ’ὔ Ν 5 ἊΝ 
τοῦτο ὃ ἔσται, ἐὰν ἀπὸ μακρᾶς ἀρχώμεθα καὶ εἰς μακρὰν 
λήγωμεν. φύσει γὰρ μεγαλεῖον ἡ μακρά, καὶ προλεγο- 

la 4 5 Ν Ν > 4 > / Ἂν 
μένη τε πλήσσει εὐθὺς καὶ ἀπολήγουσα ἐν μεγάλῳ τινὶ 
καταλείπει τὸν ἀκούοντα. πάντες γοῦν ἰδίως τῶν τε 
πρώτων μνημονεύομεν καὶ τῶν ὑστάτων, καὶ ὑπὸ τούτων 
κινούμεθα, ὑπὸ δὲ τῶν μεταξὺ ἔλαττον ὥσπερ ἐγκρυπτο- 
μένων ἢ ἐναφανιζομένων. 

40. Δῆλον δὲ τοῦτο ἐν τοῖς Θουκυδίδου: σχεδὸν γὰρ 
Ψ Ν Ν 3 a 3 “ iy 8 lat ε la 
ὅλως TO μεγαλοπρεπὲς ἐν πᾶσιν αὐτῷ ποιεῖ ἡ τοῦ ῥυθμοῦ 
iP Ν ἴω “ 
μακρότης, καὶ κινδυνεύει τῷ ἀνδρὶ τούτῳ παντοδαποῦ 
md “ n yY 3 
ὄντος τοῦ μεγαλοπρεποῦς αὕτη ἡ σύνθεσις μόνη ἢ μάλιστα 
περιποιεῖν τὸ μέγιστον. 
41. Δεῖ μέντοι λογίζεσθαι, ὅτι κἂν μὴ ἀκριβῶς δυνώ- 
(os , ΄ Ν 7 ἊΨ Ν 
μεθα τοῖς κώλοις περιτιθέναι τοὺς παίωνας ἔνθεν καὶ 
ΕΝ 
ἔνθεν ἀμφοτέρους, παιωνικήν γε πάντως ποιησόμεθα τὴν 
σύνθεσιν, οἷον ἐκ μακρῶν ἀρχόμενοι καὶ εἰς μακρὰς κατα- 
λήγοντες. τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ᾿Αριστοτέλης παραγγέλλειν 
y 5, Ν IN Ν lal lA ΄ 
ἔοικεν, ἄλλως δὲ τὸ διττὸν τοῦ παίωνος τετεχνολογηκέναι 
5 ,ὔὕ Ψ ,ὔ la ΄ > 
ἀκριβείας ἕνεκα. διόπερ Θεόφραστος παράδειγμα ἐκ- 
τέθειται μεγαλοπρεπείας τὸ τοιοῦτον κῶλον, “τῶν μὲν περὶ 
xX Ν + 4 5) 5 ἊΝ 3 4 
τὰ μηδενὸς ἄξια φιλοσοφούντων. ov yap ἐκ παιώνων 
39 ἴω 3 Ν / , > ™ ΄ 
ἀκριβῶς, ἀλλὰ παιωνικόν τί ἐστι. παραλαβεῖν μέντοι 
τὸν παίωνα εἰς τοὺς λόγους, ἐπειδὴ μικτός τίς ἐστι καὶ 
ἀσφαλέστερος, τὸ μεγαλοπρεπὲς μὲν ἐκ τῆς μακρᾶς λαμ- 
βάνων, τὸ λογικὸν δὲ ἐκ τῶν βραχειῶν. 
42. Οἱ δ᾽ ἄλλοι, ὁ μὲν ἡρῷος σεμνὸς καὶ οὐ λογικός, 
ν ε 
ἀλλ᾽ ἠχώδης: οὐδὲ εὐρυθμος, ἀλλ᾽ ἄρυθμος. ὥσπερ ὃ 
gy ἴων Ν ΄, “ 
τοιόσδε, “ἥκων ἡμῶν εἰς τὴν χώραν" ἢ γὰρ πυκνότης τῶν 
μακρῶν ὑπερπίπτει τοῦ λογικοῦ μέτρου. 

2 on ποταπὴν ἔχει δύναμιν ἡ μακρά in margine P. 11 ἢ (accentu supra 7 ἃ m. 
rec. addito) μάλιστα P. 12 περιποιεῖ P, ν supra versum addidit m.rec. P. 13 δυνώ- 
μεθα] Schneiderus, δυνάμεθα P. 15 ποιησώμεθα P. 18 τεχνολογηκέναι P. 
22 παραλαβεῖν] Steinbergerus, παραλαβῶν (Aa supra versum scripto) P. 25 Bpa- 


χείων P. 27 ἔνρυθμος P. | ἀλλ᾽’ ἄρυθμος] Victorius, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνάρυθμος P. 
28 ἐκεῖ ἥκων Ῥ, ἐκεῖ ἥκειν τὰ. rec. P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE QI 


be so if we begin with a long syllable and end with a long 
one. The long syllable has in itself something grand, and its 
use at the beginning is striking, while as a conclusion it leaves 
the hearer with a sense of elevation. Anyhow, all of us 
remember in a special degree, and are stirred by, the words 
that come first and the words that come last, whereas those 
that come between them have less effect upon us, as though 
they were obscured or hidden among the others. 

40. This is clearly seen in Thucydides, whose dignity 
of style is almost in every instance due to the long syllables 
used in his rhythms. It may even be said that the pervading 
stateliness of that writer is attained altogether, or for the 
most part, by this arrangement of words. 

41. We must, however, bear in mind that, even if we 
cannot exactly furnish the members with the two paeons at 
either end, we can at all events give a paeonic character to 
the arrangement by beginning and ending with long syllables. 
This is seemingly what Aristotle recommends, although for 
the sake of precision the two sorts of paeon are prescribed in 
his treatise. On the same principle Theophrastus has given 
as an instance of elevation the following member: ‘Those 
who philosophize in matters that are worth nought’’ This 
particular sentence is not precisely composed of paeons, yet 
it is paeonic in character. The paeon should be employed in 
discourse, since it is a mixed measure and so safer, and 
derives its elevation from the long syllable and its prose 
character from the short ones. 

42. Among the other measures the heroic is solemn and 
ill-adapted for prose. It is sonorous; not full of rhythm, 
but without it. Take, for instance, the following words: 
“This land, our land, reached now by me?. Here the reitera- 
tion of long syllables exceeds the bounds of prose. 


1 Theophr. 7. λέξεως. 2 Ser. Inc. 


σι 


Io 


15 


20 


30 


92 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡΙ EPMHNEIAS 


43. Ὁ δὲ ἴαμβος εὐτελὴς καὶ TH τῶν πολλῶν λέξει 
Ψ Ν la ᾽ > Ν lal > > / 
ὅμοιος. πολλοὶ γοῦν μέτρα ἰαμβικὰ λαλοῦσιν οὐκ εἰδότες. 
ὁ δὲ παίων ἀμφοῖν μέσος καὶ μέτριος, καὶ ὁποῖος συγ- 
κεκραμένος. ἡ μὲν δὴ παιωνικὴ ἐν τοῖς μεγαλοπρεπέσι 

΄ εξ» ΄ὔ 
σύνθεσις ὧδ᾽ ἄν πως λαμβάνοιτο. 

44. Ποιεῖ δὲ καὶ τὰ μήκη τῶν κώλων μέγεθος, οἷον 
“Θουκυδίδης ᾿Αθηναῖος  ξυνέγραψε τὸν πόλεμον τῶν Πελο- 
ποννησίων καὶ ᾿Αθηναίων, καὶ “Ἡροδότου ᾿Αλικαρνασέως 
ε 4, 5 / Ὁ ) Ν Ἂν: ΄ > a 3 
ἱστορίης ἀπόδειξις NOE. τὸ γὰρ ταχέως ἀποσιωπᾶν εἰς 
κῶλον βραχὺ κατασμικρύνει τὴν τοῦ λόγου σεμνότητα, 
κἂν ἡ ὑποκειμένη διάνοια μεγαλοπρεπὴς ἣ, κἂν τὰ 
ὀνόματα. 

Μεγαλ ἐς δὲ καὶ τὸ ἐκ περιαγωγῆς τῇ 

45. εγαλοπρεπὲς δὲ καὶ τὸ περιαγωγῆς τῇ 

a 9 A 
συνθέσει λέγειν, οἷον ὡς Θουκυδίδης: “ὃ yap ᾿Αχελῴος 
Ἂν CEs, 5 2 »y Ν ᾽ὔὕ \ 93 
ποταμὸς ῥέων ἐκ Πίνδου ὄρους διὰ Δολοπίας καὶ ᾿Αγρια- 
“ δ 3 ’ y Ν lA , 3 
νῶν καὶ ᾿Αμφιλόχων, ἀνωθεν παρὰ Στράτον πόλιν ἐς 
΄, Ν > 5 ΄ὔ Ν Ν ΄,ὔ 3 A 
θάλασσαν διεξιεὶς παρ᾽ Οἰνιάδας, καὶ τὴν πόλιν αὐτοῖς 
περιλιμνάζων ἄπορον ποιεῖ ὑπὸ τοῦ ὕδατος ἐν χειμῶνι 
στρατεύεσθαι. σύμπασα γὰρ ἡ τοιαύτη μεγαλοπρέπεια 
ἐκ τῆς περιαγωγῆς γέγονεν, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ μόγις ἀναπαῦσαι 

αὐτόν τε καὶ τὸν ἀκούοντα. 

46. Εἰ δ᾽ οὕτω διαλύσας αὐτὸ εἴποι τις: “ὁ γὰρ 
᾽᾿Αχελῷος ποταμὸς ῥεῖ μὲν ἐκ Πίνδου ὄρους, ἐκβάλλει 
δὲ map Οἰνιάδας ἐς θάλασσαν: πρὸ δὲ τῆς ἐκβολῆς τὸ 

3 la) ΄ , la) ν > 3 las Ν Ν 
Οἰνιαδῶν πεδίον λίμνην ποιεῖ, ὥστ᾽ αὐτοῖς πρὸς τὰς 
χειμερινὰς ἐφόδους τῶν πολεμίων ἔρυμα καὶ πρόβλημα 

’ Ν "ὃ b] 5 ὃ 4 Ψ Ν ε ΄ 
γίνεσθαι τὸ ὕδωρ" εἰ δή τις οὕτω μεταβαλὼν ἑρμηνεύσειεν 

5 / Ν Ν 3 4 , ox λό Ν 4 0 
αὐτό, πολλὰς μὲν ἀναπαύλας παρέξει τῷ λόγῳ, TO μέγεθος 
δ᾽ ἀφαιρήσεται. 

4 Ν Ν ἊΝ, ε Ν ε A 

47. Καθάπερ yap τὰς μακρὰς ὁδοὺς αἱ συνεχεῖς 
καταγωγαὶ μικρὰς ποιοῦσιν, αἱ δ᾽ ἐρημίαι κἀν ταῖς 


7 πελλοποννησίων P. 8 αλλικαρνασέως P. 15 ὅρους P. [᾿Αγραῶν 
codd. Thucyd. 17 διέξίεισι P. 


230° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 93 


43. The iambic measure lacks distinction and resembles 
ordinary conversation. Indeed, many people talk in iambics 
without knowing it. The paeon hits the happy mean between 
the two, and may be said to be composite. The paeonic 
structure may, accordingly, be employed in elevated passages 
after the manner thus described. 

44. Long members also contribute to grandeur of style, 
e.g. ‘Thucydides the Athenian wrote the history of the war 
between the Peloponnesians and the Athenians}, and ‘ Hero- 
dotus of Halicarnassus sets forth in this History the result 
of his inquiries’ A sudden drop into silence on a short 
member diminishes dignity of expression, elevated though 
the underlying thought and the words may be. 

45. Elevation is also caused by a rounded form of com- 
position, as in the following passage of Thucydides: ‘For 
the river Achelous flowing from Mount Pindus through 
Dolopia and the land of the Agrianians and Amphilochians, 
having passed the inland city Stratus and discharging itself 
into the sea near Oeniadae, and surrounding that town with 
a marsh, makes a winter expedition impossible owing to the 
floods*. All this impressiveness arises from the rounded 
period and from the fact that the historian hardly allows a 
pause to himself or to the reader. 

46. If the sentence were broken up and made to run as 
follows: ‘For the river Achelous flows from Mount Pindus 
and empties itself into the sea near Oeniadae; but before 
reaching the outlet it converts the plain of Oeniadae into a 
marsh, so that the water forms a defence and protection 
against the attacks of the enemy in winter,—if the phrasing 
of the sentence were to be varied in this way, there would 
be many resting-places in the narrative but its stateliness 
would be destroyed. 

47. Long journeys are shortened by a succession of 
inns, while desolate paths, even when the distances are short, 


1 Thucyd. i. 1 init. 2 Herod. i. 1 init. 3 Thucyd. ii. 102. 


σι 


Io 


20 


94 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


nw 50 A », / ΕΣ , ΕἸ XV Ἀ 
μικραῖς ὁδοῖς ἐμφασίν τινα ἔχουσι μήκους, ταὐτὸ δὴ 
κἀπὶ τῶν κώλων ἂν γίγνοιτο. 

48. Ποιεῖ δὲ καὶ δυσφωνία συνθέσεως ἐν πολλοῖς 
μέγεθος, οἷον τὸ 

Αἴας δ᾽ ὁ μέγας αἰὲν ἐφ᾽ “Ἕκτορι χαλκοκορυστῇ. 

» \ Ν y ΄ ε an / 7 
ἄλλως μὲν yap tows δυσήκοος ἡ TOV γραμμάτων σύμ- 
5 an 
πληξις, ὑπερβολὴ δ᾽ ἐμφαίνουσα τὸ μέγεθος τοῦ ἥρωος" 
ὕὔ Ἂν Ν Ν Oy > / 5 7) 
λειότης γὰρ καὶ τὸ εὐήκοον οὐ πάνυ ἐν μεγαλοπρεπείᾳ 
᾽ὔ » 5 4 5 > 7 Ν ε 4 
χώραν ἔχουσιν, εἰ μή Tov ἐν ὀλίγοις. Kal ὁ Θουκυδίδης 
δὲ πανταχοῦ σχεδὸν φεύγει τὸ λεῖον καὶ ὁμαλὲς τῆς συν- 
θέσεως, καὶ ἀεὶ μᾶλλόν τι προσκρούοντι ἔοικεν, ὥσπερ 
ε Ν 4 ε \ , 5) Ν 4 « ν Ν 
οἱ τὰς τραχείας ὁδοὺς πορευόμενοι, ἐπὰν λέγῃ, “ὅτι τὸ 
Ν \ » ε ε ὔ »» 5 Ν » 5 4 
μεν δὴ ἔτος, WS ὡμολόγητο, ἄνοσον ἐς τὰς ἀλλας ἀσθενείας 
ἐτύγχανεν ὄν. ῥᾷον μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἥδιον ὧδ᾽ ἂν τις εἶπεν, 
ν « y+ > Ν >» 5 4 xv > 4 b) LY / 
ὅτι “ἄνοσον ἐς τὰς ἄλλας ἀσθενείας ὃν ἐτύγχανεν, ἀφηρητο 
δ᾽ αὐτοῦ τὴν μεγαλοπρέπειαν. 
[2 Ν 4 \\ / 5 ? 
49. Ὥσπερ yap ὄνομα τραχὺ μέγεθος ἐργάζεται, 
οὕτω σύνθεσις. ὀνόματα δὲ τραχέα τό TE “κεκραγὼς᾽ 
5 Ν lL ἢ lal O Ν XN ¢ £ / 7 5 ἈΝ Ac / ᾽ 
ἀντὶ τοῦ "βοῶν, καὶ τὸ “ῥηγνύμενον᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ “φερόμενον, 
ν nan ε ,ὔ᾿ “ ν / , 
οἵοις πᾶσιν ὁ Θουκυδίδης χρῆται, ὅμοια λαμβάνων τά τε 
ὀνόματα τῇ συνθέσει, τοῖς τε ὀνόμασι τὴν σύνθεσιν. 
, Ν Ν 5 4 Ν / Ν / 
50. Taooew δὲ τὰ ὀνόματα χρὴ τόνδε τὸν τρόπον. 
la) A 4 \ Ν 4 > lal // Ν Ν 
πρῶτα μὲν τιθέναι τὰ μὴ μάλα ἐναργῆ, δεύτερα δὲ καὶ 
ὕστατα τὰ ἐναργέστερα. οὕτω γὰρ καὶ τοῦ πρώτου ἀκου- 
σόμεθα ὡς ἐναργοῦς, καὶ τοῦ μετ᾽ αὐτὸ ὡς ἐναρ)γεστέρου. 
3 Ν ΄ὕ , 3 2 Ν ἕν 
εἰ δὲ μή, δόξομεν ἐξησθενηκέναι, καὶ οἷον καταπεπτω- 
κέναι ἀπὸ ἰσχυροτέρου ἐπὶ ἀσθενές. 
4 Ν Ν ΑΝ A A ͵7ὔ 
oI. Παράδειγμα δὲ τὸ παρὰ τῷ ἸΙλάτωνι λεγόμενον, 
ὅτι “ἐπὰν μέν τις μουσικῇ παρέχῃ καταυλεῖν καὶ κατα- 


5. χαλκοκορυστῆι P. 7 ὑπερβολὴ: β in rasura add. m. rec. P. 8 μεγαλο- 


mpémevat ( add. m. rec.) P. 13 ωμολόγει (sine spiritu) τὸ (sine accentu) P. 
14 ἡδεῖον P. 20 οἵοις πᾶσιν] Hammerus, of σπᾶσιν P.| ὁ bis scripsit P in 
transitu versus. 22 περὶ συνθέσεως λόγου titulus in P. | τὸν supra versum 
addidit m. rec. P. 26 δόξωμεν P.| καὶ post ἐξησθενηκέναι ins. edd. 


29 ὅταν Platonis libri. παρέχει P. | καταχεῖν τῆς ψυχῆς Plat. 


230" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 95 


give the impression of length. Precisely the same principle 
will apply also in the case of members. 

48. In many passages an impressive effect is produced 
by a harsh collocation of words, as for example in the line :— 
And Aias the mighty at Hector the brazen-helmed evermore 

Was aiming his lance’. 

No doubt the clashing of letters is, as a rule, unpleasant to 
the ear, but here the very excess brings out the greatness of 
the hero, since in the elevated style smoothness and pleasant 
cadences have no place, except here and there. Thucydides 
almost invariably avoids smoothness and evenness of com- 
position. He has rather the constant air of a man who is 
stumbling, like travellers on rough roads, as when he says 
that ‘from other maladies this year, by common consent, was 
free?’ It would have been easier and pleasanter to say that 
‘by common consent, this year was free from other maladies. 
But this would have destroyed the effectiveness of the sentence. 

49. Composition makes style impressive in the same 
way as a rugged word does. Instances of rugged words are 
‘shrieking’ in place of ‘crying, and ‘bursting’ in place of 
‘charging. Thucydides uses all expressions of this kind, 
assimilating the words to the composition and the compo 
sition to the words. 

50. Words should be arranged in the following way. 
First should be placed those that are not specially vivid ; in 
the second or last place should come those that are more so. 
In this way what comes first will strike the ear as vivid, and 
what follows as more vivid still. Failing this, we shall seem 
to have lost vigour, and (so to speak) to have lapsed from 
strength to weakness. 

51. An illustration will be found in a passage of Plato: 
‘when a man suffers music to play upon him and to flood his 


1 Hom. 771. xvi. 358, 
Αἴας δ᾽ ὁ μέγας αἰὲν ἐφ᾽ “Ἕκτορι χαλκοκορυστῇ 
ler’ ἀκοντίσσαι. 


2 Thucyd. il. 49. 


96 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


~ ὃ Ν nw A ) Ν Ν Ν 4 5 4 
χεῖν διὰ τῶν WTwY: πολὺ yap TO δεύτερον ἐναργέστερον 
τοῦ προτέρου. καὶ πάλιν προϊών φησιν, “ὅταν δὲ κατα- 
4 Ν -} “ 5 ‘\ “ Ν δὴ Ν nw » 4 Ν 
χέων μὴ avy, ἀλλὰ κηλῇ, τὸ δὴ μετὰ τοῦτο ἤδη τήκει καὶ 
λ ΄ ᾽ Ν \ re ΄ ) Aces, 2 5 ΄ \ 
είβει. τὸ yap “λείβει᾽ τοῦ “τήκει᾽ ἐμφατικώτερον καὶ 
5 ἐγγυτέρω ποιήματος. εἰ δὲ προεξήνεγκεν αὐτό, ἀσθενέ. 
στερον ἂν τὸ “τήκει ἐπιφερόμενον ἐφάνη. 
52. Καὶ Ὅμηρος δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ Κύκλωπος ἀεὶ ἐπαύξει 
Ν ε 4 ἊΝ 5 / Sy) > an »»Ἁ, a 
τὴν ὑπερβολήν, καὶ ἐπανιόντι ἐπ᾽ αὐτῆς ἔοικεν, οἷον 
οὐ γὰρ ἐῴκει 
το ἀνδρί γε σιτοφάγῳ, ἀλλὰ ῥίῳ ὕὑληεντι, 
Ν ᾽ὕ ε Ἂν \ ε 4 “ + 
καὶ προσέτι ὑψηλοῦ ὄρους καὶ ὑπερφαινομένου τῶν ἄλλων 
ὀρῶν. ἀεὶ γὰρ καίτοι μεγάλα ὄντα τὰ πρότερον ἥττονα 
φαίνεται, μειζόνων αὐτοῖς τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα ἐπιφερομένων. 
TEN \ \ \ , N , 3 
53. Χρὴ δὲ καὶ τοὺς συνδέσμους μὴ μάλα ἀνταπο- 
15 δίδοσθαι ἀκριβῶς, οἷον τῷ “μὲν συνδέσμῳ τὸν ‘dé 
Ν Ν ε oS) 4 5 ἊΝ Ν 5 / 
μικροπρεπὲς yap ἡ ἀκρίβεια: ἀλλὰ Kal ἀτακτοτέρως πως 
¢ Ν Ν 
Ἢ μὲν yap 
nw aA » ᾽͵ Ν Ν 7) Lp 5 ε ὩΝ 
νῆσος ἣν ἔχομεν, δήλη μὲν καὶ πόρρωθέν ἐστιν, ὑψηλὴ 


« 


χρῆσθαι, καθάπερ που ὁ ᾿Αντιφῶν λέγει: 


καὶ τραχεῖα: καὶ τὰ μὲν χρήσιμα καὶ ἐργάσιμα μικρὰ 
20 αὐτῆς ἐστι, τὰ δὲ ἀργὰ πολλὰ σμικρᾶς αὐτῆς οὔσης." 
\ Ν lay « \ 9, δέ Ὁ ε “δὲ 5 δίδ 

τρισὶ γὰρ τοῖς ‘pev’ συνδέσμοις εἷς ὁ ‘OE ἀνταποδίδοται. 

54. Πολλάκις μέντοι τεθέντες πως ἐφεξῆς σύνδεσμοι 

an ε ἴω 

καὶ τὰ μικρὰ μεγάλα ποιοῦσιν, ws παρ᾽ Ὁμήρῳ τῶν 

Βοιωτιακῶν πόλεων τὰ ὀνόματα εὐτελῆ ὄντα καὶ μικρὰ 

A Ν »» Ν ᾽ὔὕ Ν ‘A 4 5 nw 

25 ὄγκον τινὰ ἔχει Kal μέγεθος διὰ τοὺς συνδέσμους ἐφεξῆς 
τοσούτους τεθέντας, οἷον ἐν τῷ 

Σχοῖνόν te Σκῶλόν τε, πολύκνημόν T ᾿Ετεωνόν. 

55. Τοῖς δὲ παραπληρωματικοῖς συνδέσμοις χρη- 

στέον, οὐχ ὡς προσθήκαις κεναῖς καὶ οἷον προσφύμασιν 

2 καταχέων P: ἐπέχων Plat. 3 κήλη Ρ. a supra 7 alterum add. m. rec. P. 


5 εγγυτέρω ex εγγυτέρον m. rec. P. 6 ἐπιφερόμενον ex ἐπιφερόμενος m. rec. P. 
8 ἔοικεν edd.: om. P. Io post ῥίω add. ἄκρα κορυφῆ κρημνῶ P, quae verba 
τ 


punctis notata sunt. 11 ὄρος P. 12 ονταπρότερον P. 15 τὸν δὲ ex τῶ 
δὲ m. rec. P. 17 ἡ μὲν yap] Capperonerius, 7 yap P. 18 ἦν ἐχομένη δήλη P. 
20 αὑτῆς ex αὕτη τη. rec. P. | dpxya (fort. ex apwya) P. 27 σκῶλον ex σκωλόν 
(ut videtur) m. rec. P. 


DEMETRIOS ON STYLE 97 


soul through his ears’. Here the second expression is far 
more vivid than the first. And further on he says: ‘but 
when he ceases not to flood it, nay throws a spell over it, 
he causes it to melt and waste away”. The word ‘waste’ is 
stronger than the word ‘melt,’ and approaches more nearly to 
poetry. If Plato had reversed the order, the verb ‘melt, 
coming in the second place, would have appeared weaker. 
52. Homer, also, in describing the Cyclops, augments 
continuously his hyperbole and seems to mount higher and 
higher on its steps :— 
Not like to the sons of men, but seeming a forest-clad crest? ; 


and what is more, the crest of a lofty mountain and one that 
towers above its fellows. For great though they may be, the 
things which come first seem lesser, when greater things 
follow them. 

53. Connectives, again, such as μὲν and δέ, should 
not correspond too nicely. There is something trivial in 
excessive nicety. A certain negligence in the use of particles 
is desirable, just as Antiphon somewhere says: ‘for the island 
we inhabit can be seen from a distance to be lofty and 
rugged. Those parts of it which are tilled and useful are 
insignificant, while the uncultivated portions are many, small 
though the island is*’ There is here only one δέ to answer 
to the repeated μέν. 

54. On the other hand, it often happens that connec- 
tives which follow one another in close succession make even 
small things great, as in Homer the names of the Boeotian 
towns, though ordinary and insignificant, possess a certain 
high-sounding pomp owing to the accumulated connectives, 
for example in the line: 

And in Schoenus and Scolus, and midst Eteonus’ hill-clefts deep’. 


55. Expletive particles must not be employed as point- 
less appendages and excrescences so to say or expansions, as 
1 Plat. Ref. iii. 411 A. 2 Plat. Ref. 111. 411 B. 
3 Hom. Od. ix. 190, οὐδὲ ἐῴκει 
ἀνδρί γε σιτοφάγῳ, ἀλλὰ ῥίῳ ὑλήεντι 
ὑψηλῶν ὀρέων, ὅ τε φαίνεται οἷον am’ ἄλλων. 


4 Antiphon, 2 γαρηι. 50 (Blass). > Hom. //. il. 497. 


R. 7 


98 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


a» 4 SZ, la A 
ἢ παραξύσμασιν, ὥσπερ τινὲς τῷ “δὴ χρῶνται πρὸς 
2O\ \ a ) \ a / ) » 
οὐδὲν καὶ τῷ 'νν᾽ Kal τῷ “πρότερον, GAN ἂν συμβάλ- 
λωνταί τι τῷ μεγέθει τοῦ λόγου, 
4 Ν 4 Ὁ 13 Ν Ν 4 > 
56. καθάπερ παρὰ Ἰ]λάτωνι, “ὁ μὲν δὴ μέγας ἐν 
Ὶ 9 Ζεύς: καὶ ᾿ Ὁμή 
Ξ οὐρανῷ Ζεύς παρ᾽ Ὁμήρῳ, 
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε δὴ πόρον ἷξον ἐὺρρεῖος ποταμοῖο. 
3 ἊΝ Ν Ν ε ͵ὔ Ν > ,ὔ an 
ἀρκτικὸς yap τεθεὶς ὁ σύνδεσμος καὶ ἀποσπάσας TOV 
προτέρων τὰ ἐχόμενα μεγαλεῖόν τι εἰργάσατο. αἱ γὰρ 
πολλαὶ ἀρχαὶ σεμνότητα ἐργάζονται. εἰ δ᾽ ὧδε εἶπεν, 
το “ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε ἐπὶ τὸν πόρον ἀφίκοντο τοῦ ποταμοῦ, μικρολο- 
γοῦντι ἐῴκει καὶ ἔτι ὡς περὶ ἑνὸς πράγματος λέγοντι. 
57. Λαμβάνεται δὲ καὶ παθητικῶς πολλάκις ὁ σύνδεσ- 
a Ψ ΠΝ νΝ - an N N 3 ΄ 
μος οὗτος, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τῆς Καλυψοῦς πρὸς τὸν ᾿Οδυσσέα, 
Διογενὲς Λαερτιάδη, πολυμήχαν ᾿Οδυσσεῦ, 
“ \ 5 / / > / a 
15 οὕτω δὴ οἰκόνδε φίλην ἐς πατρίδα γαῖαν; 
> la) Ν 4 > / i? Ν Ν 
εἰ γοῦν τὸν σύνδεσμον ἐξέλοις, συνεξαιρήσεις καὶ τὸ 
πάθος. καθόλου γάρ, ὥσπερ ὃ Πραξιφάνης φησίν, ἀντὶ 
μυγμῶν  παρελαμβάνοντο οἱ τοιοῦτοι σύνδεσμοι καὶ στε- 231° 
lal ν Ν GN y) \ Ν ‘ an) ΝΣ ς α΄, A 
ναγμῶν, ὥσπερ TO ‘al al, καὶ TO “φεῦ, Kal “ποῖόν τί 
3 ue δ. See , ΄ 5... 15 ΄ ? 
20€oTW ; ὡς αὐτός φησι, TO “καί νύ κ᾽ ὀδυρομένοισιν 
ἔπρεψεν, ἔμφασίν τινα ἔχον οἰκτροῦ ὀνόματος. 
58. Οἱ δὲ πρὸς οὐδὲν ἀναπληροῦντες, φησί, τὸν σύν- 
δεσμον ἐοίκασιν τοῖς ὑποκριταῖς τοῖς τὸ καὶ τὸ πρὸς 
2»QX y+ / @ 4 @ ΄ 
οὐδὲν ἔπος λέγουσιν, οἷον εἴ τις ὧδε λέγοι, 
25 Καλυδὼν μὲν ἥδε γαῖα Ἰ]ελοπείας χθονός, 
φεῦ. 


>? > / y> Ω ’ > / 
ἐν ἀντιπόρθμοις πεδί᾽ ἔχουσ᾽ εὐδαίμονα, 


ec Ν ΄ Ν ΕΥ x Ν Ν la 5 ,ὔ ν Ν 
ὡς γὰρ παρέλκει τὸ al al καὶ τὸ φεῦ ἐνθάδε, οὕτω καὶ 
30 ὁ πανταχοῦ μάτην ἐμβαλλόμενος σύνδεσμος. 


2 ἄλλαι συμβάλλονται in ἀλλ᾽ ἂν συμβάλλωνται corr. m. rec. P. 4 μέγας 
ἡγεμὼν Plato. ἀποσπάσας] Finckhius, ἀποσπασθεὶς P. 9 o7 in margine P. 
12 παθητικῶς] ap. Greg. Cor., παθητικοῖς P. 17 τί φησι πραξιφάνης on 


in margine P. 30 ἐμβαλλόμενος σύνδεσμος] ap. Greg. Cor., ἐμβαλλόμενος P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 99 


δή and νυ and πρότερον are sometimes aimlessly used. They 
must be introduced only if they contribute to elevation of 
expression, 

56. asin Plato ‘lo mighty Zeus in his heaven”’; and in 
Homer 


But lo when they came to the ford of the fair-flowing river’. 


The particle placed thus at the beginning of the sentence and 
separating what follows from what precedes, creates the im- 
pression of elevation. Amplified beginnings have an imposing 
effect. If the poet had said ‘but when they arrived at the 
ford of the river, he would have seemed to be using trivial 
language and to be describing a single occurrence. 

57. The particle 6) is also often used with a touch of 
feeling, as in the words which Calypso addresses to Odysseus :— 


O Zeus’ seed, son of Laertes, Odysseus of many an art, 
Is it so, that home to thine own dear land thou art fain to depart?? 


Remove the particle, and you will at the same time remove 
the feeling conveyed by the line. In general, as Praxiphanes 
says, such particles used to be employed in place of moanings 
and laments. Instances are ‘ah me!’ and ‘alas!’ and ‘oh, 
what is it?’ As he himself says, the words καί νύ κε were 
fittingly applied to men who are ‘lamenting,’ since they 
suggest in some degree a word of mourning*. 

58. But those who use expletive particles aimlessly 
resemble, he says, actors who employ this exclamation and 
that casually, as though one were to say 


Calydonian soil is this, whose fertile plains 
(Alas !) 

Look o’er the narrow seas to Pelops’ land 
(Ah me!)*. 


For as in this passage the ‘ah me!’ and the ‘alas!’ are merely 
dragged in, so is the connective when it is inserted cause- 
lessly and indiscriminately. 


1 Plat. Phaedr. 546 Ε. 2 Hom. 77. xiv. 433, XXi. I. 

3 Hom. Odyss. v. 203. 

4 Hom. 71. xxiii. 154, καί νύ x’ ὀδυρομένοισιν ἔδυ φάος ἠελίοιο : also Odyss. xvi. 
220, xxl. 226. 

> Eurip. Weleag. (Eurip. Fragm. 515 Nauck?). 


σι 


Io 


20 


25 


100 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


59. Οἱ μὲν δὴ σύνδεσμοι τὴν σύνθεσιν μεγαλοπρεπῆ 
ποιοῦσιν, ὡς εἴρηται, τὰ δὲ σχήματα τῆς λέξεώς ἐστι μὲν 
Ν 3 Ν / 4 > Ν Ν Ν Ν 5 \ ΄ 
καὶ αὐτὰ συνθέσεώς τι εἶδος: τὸ γὰρ δὴ τὰ αὐτὰ λέγειν 
δὶς διπλοῦντα ἢ ἐπαναφέροντα ἢ ἀνθυπαλλάσσοντα δια- 
ταττομένῳ καὶ μετασυντιθέντι ἔοικεν. διατακτέον δὲ τὰ 
πρόσφορα αὐτῶν χαρακτῆρι ἑκάστῳ, οἷον τῷ μεγαλο- 

πρεπεῖ μὲν περὶ οὗ πρόκειται, ταῦτα: 

60. πρῶτον μὲν τὴν ἀνθυπαλλαγήν, ὡς Ὅμηρος, 

ε \ 4 / ς \ > Ν > \ ς / 
οἱ δὲ δύο σκόπελοι ὁ μὲν οὐρανὸν εὐρὺν ἱκάνει" 

\ Ν 9 ,ὕ 3 , ΄ Ἃ 
πολὺ γὰρ οὕτω μεγαλειότερον ἐναλλαγείσης πτώσεως, ἢ 
εἴπερ οὕτως ἔφη, 

a ‘ / , ς \ > \ ᾽ ΄ 
τῶν δὲ δύο σκοπέλων ὁ μὲν οὐρανὸν εὐρύν' 

΄ὕὔ Ν 3 ΄ a δὲ Ν ΄ , 
συνήθως yap ἐλέγετο. πᾶν δὲ τὸ σύνηθες μικροπρεπές, 
διὸ καὶ ἀθαύμαστον. 

61. Τὸν δὲ Νιρέα, αὐτόν τε ὄντα μικρὸν καὶ τὰ 
πράγματα αὐτοῦ μικρότερα, τρεῖς ναῦς καὶ ὀλίγους avdpas, 

΄ Ν aN > ΄ Ν Ν > y ©) ΄ an 
μέγαν καὶ μεγάλα ἐποίησεν καὶ πολλὰ ἀντ᾽ ὀλίγων, τῷ 
ἴω Ν La) ἴω 
σχήματι διπλῷ καὶ μικτῷ χρησάμενος ἐξ ἐπαναφορᾶς τε 
\ , G \ Rn 3) F A A ¥ 
καὶ διαλύσεως. “Νιρεὺς γάρ, φησι, “τρεῖς νῆας ayer, 
oh 2 
Νιρεὺς ᾿Αγλαΐης vids, Νιρεύς, ὃς κάλλιστος ἀνήρ: ἢ τε 
Ν > Ν fa) / > Ν Ν > Ν » \ / 
yap ἐπαναφορὰ τῆς λέξεως ἐπὶ TO αὐτὸ ὄνομα τὸν Νιρέα, 
Ν ε , a 2 3 7 , / , 
καὶ ἡ διάλυσις, πληθός τι ἐμφαίνει πραγμάτων, καίτοι δύο 
ἢ τριῶν ὄντων. 
Ψ ἴω 
62. Καὶ σχεδὸν ara τοῦ Νιρέως ὀνομασθέντος ἐν 
τῷ δράματι μεμνήμεθα οὐδὲν ἧττον ἢ τοῦ ᾿Αχιλλέως καὶ 
D δράματι μεμνήμ ἧττον ἢ x 
an / > » ν 
τοῦ ᾿Οδυσσέως, καίτοι κατ᾽ ἔπος ἕκαστον λαλουμένων 
/ ΘΈΑΙ δὲ ε la 4 ὃ 4 > 3 ν 
σχεδόν. αἰτία δ᾽ ἡ τοῦ σχήματος δύναμις: εἰ δ᾽ οὕτως 
> ‘6 Ν 6.9 he ex > /, lay lal > ? 
εἶπεν, ‘Nupevs ὁ ᾿Αγλαΐας υἱὸς ἐκ Σύμης τρεῖς νῆας ἦγεν, 
ο lal 
παρασεσιωπηκότι ἐῴκει τὸν Nipéa ὥσπερ yap ἐν ταῖς 
I περὶ σχήματος λέξεως titulus in P. 3 τὸ] Victorius, ray P. 5 μετα- 
συνθεσιν P, μετασυντιθέντι (τι...τι Supra versum scripto) m. rec. P. 8 ὅμηρος 
in marg. P. 15 verxpéa P. 16 ὅμηρος in marg. P. 17 μέγα καὶ μεγάλα 
P: μεγάλους Greg. Cor. 19, 20 vnpevs ubique P. 20. vids τε P. | ὡς P. 


21 νειρέα P. 24 νειρέως Ρ. 26 κατὰ τῶν (ut videtur) P.: κατὰ Gregorius 
Cor. | ἑκάστων P. 28 νηρεὺς P. 29 νηρέα P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE IOI 


59. Now while the connectives, as has been said, elevate 
the composition, the figures of speech are themselves a form 
of composition, since it is practically a matter of arrangement 
and distribution when you say the same thing twice, whether 
through repeating it, or through echoing it, or through 
changing its terms. The appropriate figures must be assigned 
to each several style. To the elevated style, our present 
subject, must be assigned first of all:— 

ΘΟ. ‘Anthypallage, as in Homer's line, 


And the twin rocks—one of the twain with its peak towers up to 
the skies’. 

With the grammatical case thus assimilated, the line is far 

more stately than if the poet had written :— 


And of the twin rocks one with its peak towers up to the skies. 


That would have been the ordinary way of putting it. But 
everything ordinary is trivial, and so fails to win admiration. 

61. Again, take Nireus—he is personally mean, and his 
share is meaner still, three ships and a handful of men. But 
Homer has made him great, and multiplied his following, 
through using in combination the two figures of ‘repetition’ 
and ‘disjunction.’ ‘Nireus,’ he says, ‘brought three ships, 
Nireus Aglaea’s son, Nireus the goodliest man’. The re- 
currence to one and the same name ‘Nireus, and the 
disjunction, give an impression of multiplied power, though 
it is composed of but two or three items. 

62. Thus, though Nireus is hardly once mentioned in 
the course of the action, we remember him no less than 
Achilles and Odysseus, who are spoken of in almost every 
line. The influence of the figure is the cause. If Homer 
had simply said ‘Nireus the son of Aglaea brought three 
ships from Syme,’ this would have been tantamount to pass- 
ing over Nireus in silence. It is with writing as with ban- 

1 Hom. Odyss. xii. 73. 

2 Hom. 77: ii. 671, 

Νιρεὺς ad Σύμηθεν ἄγε τρεῖς νῆας ἐΐσας; 
Νιρεὺς ᾿Αγλαΐης υἱὸς Χαρόποιό 7’ ἄνακτος, 
Νιρεὺς ὃς κάλλιστος ἀνὴρ ὑπὸ Ἴλιον ἦλθεν 
τῶν ἄλλων Δαναῶν μετ᾽ ἀμύμονα Πηλείωνα. 


on 


io 


20 


25 


102 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


ἑστιάσεσι τὰ ὀλίγα διαταχθέντα πως πολλὰ φαίνεται, 
οὕτω κἀν τοῖς λόγοις. 

63. Πολλαχοῦ μέντοι τὸ ἐναντίον TH λύσει, ἡ συνά- 

, Ε ΄, A a 9 aD ΄' 
φεια, μεγέθους αἴτιον γίνεται μᾶλλον, οἷον ὅτι " ἐστρατεύ- 
ο Lal 
ovto Ἑλληνές τε καὶ Κᾶρες καὶ Λύκιοι καὶ Πάμφυλοι 
XN , ) ε Ν a 5 A ΄ / > ΄ 
καὶ Φρύγες. 1 γὰρ τοῦ αὐτοῦ συνδέσμου θέσις ἐμφαίνει 
τι ἄπειρον πλῆθος. 

64. Τὸ δὲ τοιοῦτο “κυρτά, φαληριόωντα, τῇ ἐξαι- 

΄ O ς XD δι, , ay a 
ρέσει TOV ‘kal συνδέσμου μεγαλειότερον ἀπέβη μᾶλλον, 
x Sey ¢ Ν Ν ΄ ᾽ 
ἢ εἰ εἶπεν, “ κυρτὰ καὶ φαληριόωντα. 

65. [Τὸ] μεγαλεῖον μέντοι ἐν τοῖς σχήμασιν τὸ μηδὲ] 
ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς μένειν πτώσεως, ὡς Θουκυδίδης, ‘Kal πρῶτος 
3 ΄ὔ San Ν 3 / 5 ΄ ΄ Ν 
ἀποβαίνων ἐπὶ τὴν ἀποβάθραν ἐλειποψύχησέ τε, καὶ 
πεσόντος αὐτοῦ ἐς τὴν παρεζξειρεσίαν᾽ πολὺ γὰρ οὕτως 
μεγαλειότερον, ἢ εἴπερ ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς πτώσεως οὕτως 
,, 2 .«Ὗ 9 \ / Ἂ b) / Ν 
ἔφη, ὅτι “ ἔπεσεν ἐς τὴν παρεξειρεσίαν καὶ ἀπέβαλε τὴν 
ἀσπίδα. 

66. Καὶ ἀναδίπλωσις δ᾽ ἔπους εἰργάσατο μέγεθος, 
ὡς Ἡρόδοτος “δράκοντες δέ που, φησίν, “ἦσαν ἐν τῷ 
Καυκάσῳ μέγεθος, καὶ μέγεθος καὶ πλῆθος. δὶς ῥηθὲν 
τὸ “μέγεθος᾽ ὄγκον τινὰ τῇ ἑρμηνείᾳ παρέσχεν. 

67. Χρῆσθαι μέντοι τοῖς σχήμασι μὴ πυκνοῖς: 
ἀπειρόκαλον γὰρ καὶ παρεμφαῖνόν τινα τοῦ λόγου ἀνω- 
΄ ε κι 5 lal Ν ΄ > a , 
μαλίαν. οἱ γοῦν ἀρχαῖοι πολλὰ σχήματα ἐν τοῖς λόγοις 
τιθέντες συνηθέστεροι τῶν ἀσχηματίστων εἰσίν, διὰ τὸ 

ἐντέχνως τιθέναι. 

68. Περὶ δὲ συγκρούσεως φωνηέντων ὑπέλαβον ἀλλοι 
᾿Ξ" 3 / Ν Ν 3 “2 / 
ἄλλως. Ἰσοκράτης μὲν yap ἐφυλάττετο συμπλήσσειν 

3 ΄ Ν ε 9 Ὁ 3 les oy, δέ ε » , 
αὐτά, Kal Ol ἀπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, αλλοι O€ τινες ὡς ἐτυχε συνέ- 

9 μεγαλιότερον Ῥ. 10 εἰ ante εἶπεν add. Victorius. 11 τὸ seclusi. 


15 μεγαλιότερον P. 16 παρεξειρασίαν P. 18 ἀναδιπλώσας δ᾽ ἔπος P, ἀνα- 
δίπλωσις δ᾽ ἔπους τη. rec. P. 27 περὶ συγκρούσεως titulusin P. 28 συνπλήσσειν P. 


231” 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 103 


quets, where a few dishes may be so arranged as to seem 
many. 

63. In many passages, however, the opposite figure to 
separation, viz. combination, tends to elevation of style: e.g. 
“ΤῸ the war flocked both Greeks and Carians and Lycians 
and Pamphylians and Phrygians!’ The repeated use of the 
same conjunction gives the impression of an innumerable host. 

64. But in such a phrase as ‘high-arched, foam-crested 
the omission of the conjunction ‘and’ lends an air of greater 
distinction to the discourse than its insertion would have 
done: ‘high-arched and foam-crested?.’ 

65. In constructing a sentence it is well, in order to 
attain elevation, not to keep to the same case, but to follow 
the example of Thucydides, when he writes: ‘And being the 
first to step on to the gangway he swooned, and when he had 
fallen upon the forepart of the ship his shield dropped into 
the sea*’ This is far more striking than if he had retained 
the same construction, and had said that ‘he fell upon the 
forepart of the ship and lost his shield.’ 

66. The repetition of a word also conduces to elevation, 
as in the following passage of Herodotus: ‘There were huge 
serpents in the Caucasus, huge and many*’ The reiteration 
of the word ‘huge’ imparts a certain impressiveness to the style. 

67. Overloading with figures should, however, be avoided, 
as betokening lack of taste and producing a certain inequality 
of style. The ancient writers, it is true, employ a number of 
figures in their works, but they employ them so artistically 
that their writing is more natural than that of those who 
eschew them entirely. 

68. With regard to hiatus different opinions have been 
held by different persons. Isocrates and his followers avoided 
hiatus, while others have admitted it whenever it chanced to 


ἘΠ Scralne: 

2 Hom. 71. xiii. 798, ἐν δέ τε πολλὰ 

κύματα παφλάζοντα πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης; 
κυρτὰ φαληριόωντα, πρὸ μέν T ἄλλ᾽, αὐτὰρ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλα. 

3 Thucyd. iv. 12, καὶ πειρώμενος ἀποβαίνειν ἀνεκόπη ὑπὸ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων, καὶ 
τραυματισθεὶς πολλὰ ἐλιποψύχησέ τε καὶ πεσόντος αὐτοῦ ἐς τὴν παρεξειρεσίαν ἡ ἀσπὶς 
περιερρύη ἐς τὴν θάλασσαν, κτλ. 

4 Vid. Herod. i. 203. 


5 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


104 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


\ / aA Ν 37 5 , lal Ν 
κρουσαν καὶ παντάπασι: δεῖ δὲ οὔτε ἠχώδη ποιεῖν τὴν 
σύνθεσιν, ἀτέχνως αὐτὰ συμπλήσσοντα καὶ ws ἔτυχε: 
διασπασμῷ γὰρ τοῦ λόγου τὸ τοιοῦτον καὶ διαρρίψει 
35, » Ν lal / Ν 4 
ἔοικεν: οὔτε μὴν παντελῶς φυλάσσεσθαι THY συνέχειαν 
τῶν γραμμάτων: λειοτέρα μὲν γὰρ οὕτως ἔσται ἴσως ἡ 

7 > 4 \ Ν \ 3 la) Ν 5 
σύνθεσις, ἀμουσοτέρα δὲ καὶ κωφὴ ἀτεχνῶς, πολλὴν εὐ- 
φωνίαν ἀφαιρεθεῖσα τὴν γινομένην ἐκ τῆς συγκρούσεως. 

69. Σκεπτέον δὲ πρῶτον μέν, ὅτι καὶ ἡ συνήθεια 
αὐτὴ συμπλήττει τὰ γράμματα ταῦτα τοῖς ὀνόμασιν, 
καίτοι στοχαζομένη μάλιστα εὐφωνίας, οἷον ἐν τῷ Αἰακὸς 

Ν ΄’΄ Ν Ν Ν Ν / a 4 
Kal χιών. πολλὰ δὲ Kal διὰ μόνων τῶν φωνηέντων συν- 
τίθησιν ὀνόματα, οἷον Aiain καὶ ύιος, οὐδέν τε δυσφω- 

, na » > \ an 3 > » \ 
voTepa τῶν ἄλλων ἐστὶ ταῦτα, ἀλλ᾽ Lows καὶ μουσι- 
κώτερα. 

΄ὔ Ν ΄, -“ Ν SIP, 4 

70. Ta ye μὴν ποιητικά, οἷον τὸ ἠέλιος, διῃρημένον 
καὶ συγκρονόμενον ἐπίτηδες, εὐφωνότερόν ἐστι τοῦ ἥλιος 
καὶ τὸ ὀρέων τοῦ ὀρῶν. ἔχει γάρ τινα ἡ λύσις καὶ ἡ 

iy eo > Ν 5 4 Ν Ν XY? 
σύγκρουσις οἷον @dny ἐπιγινομένην. πολλὰ δὲ Kal ἀλλα 
ἐν συναλοιφῇ μὲν λεγόμενα δύσφορα ἦν, διαιρεθέντα δὲ 

Ν 
καὶ συγκρουσθέντα εὐφωνότερα, ὡς τὸ “πάντα μὲν τὰ νέα 

Ν ,ὔ > ) 5 Ν ,ὔ » ς tpt) d 
καὶ καλά ἐστιν. εἰ δὲ συναλείψας εἴποις “καλά “oTW, 
δυσφωνότερον ἔσται τὸ λεγόμενον καὶ εὐτελέστερον. 

71. “Ev Αἰγύπτῳ δὲ καὶ τοὺς θεοὺς ὑμνοῦσι διὰ τῶν 
ες Ν. 4 ε ε “a 5 la) 5 ~ > / Ν 5 Ν 
ἑπτὰ φωνηέντων οἱ ἱερεῖς, ἐφεξῆς ἠχοῦντες αὐτά, καὶ ἀντὶ 
αὐλοῦ καὶ ἀντὶ κιθάρας τῶν γραμμάτων τούτων ὁ ἦχος 

ν an 
ἀκούεται ὑπ᾽ εὐφωνίας, ὥστε ὁ ἐξαιρῶν THY σύγκρουσιν 

2QA ΒΝ ΩΝ ΄ 3 a 3 a la , \ a 
οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ μέλος ἀτεχνῶς ἐξαιρεῖ τοῦ λόγου καὶ μοῦσαν. 
ἀλλὰ περὶ τούτων μὲν οὐ καιρὸς μηκύνειν ἴσως. 

72. “Ev δὲ τῴ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ χαρακτῆρι σύγκρουσις 
παραλαμβάνοιτ᾽ ἂν πρέπουσα ἤτοι διὰ μακρῶν, ὡς τὸ 


5. γραμμάτων (π εἴ γ, h. 6. πραγμάτων, supra versum scripsit m. rec.) Ρ. 


6 ἀμουσώτερα P. 9 avrn P. 13 τῶν Supra versum ante ἄλλων add. P, 
17 ὁρέων Ρ. Ig συναλειφῆ in συναλοιφῆ corr. m. rec. Ρ. 21 εἰ δὲ 
συναλείψας εἴποις καλά or in margine Ρ. 25. κηθάρας (η punctis notato) Ρ. 


26 ἐξαιρων Ρ. 27 ἀτέχνως ἐξαίρει Ῥ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 105 


occur. The true course lies between the two extremes. The 
composition should not be noisy, as it will be if the vowels 
are allowed inartistically to collide just as they fall together, 
producing the impression of a jerky and disjointed style. On 
the other hand, the direct contact of such letters should not 
be shunned altogether. The composition will perhaps be 
smoother in this way, but it will be less tasteful and fall 
altogether flat, when robbed of all the music which results 
from the concurrence of vowels. 

69. It is worthy of remark, in the first place, that 
common parlance itself, though it aims at euphony above 
all things, brings these letters into contact in such words as 
Αἰακός and χιών. It also forms many words of vowels and 
of vowels only, e.g. Alain and Eivos, and these, so far from 
being less pleasant to the ear than others, possibly seem 
even more harmonious. 

70. Poetical forms such as ἠέλιος, where the resolution 
and the concurrence are designed, have a better sound than 
ἥλιος, and the same is true of ὀρέων as compared with ὀρῶν. 
The resolution and the concurrence have the effect of actually 
making the words sing themselves. Many other words would 
be disagreeable if run together, but are pleasanter when 
they are separated and chime, e.g. πάντα μὲν τὰ νέα καὶ 
καλά eotiv'. If you were to fuse the vowels into καλά 
στιν, the expression would be less euphonious and more 
commonplace. 

71. In Egypt the priests, when singing hymns in praise 
of the gods, employ the seven vowels, which they utter in due 
succession ; and the sound of these letters is so euphonious 
that men listen to it in preference to flute and lyre. To 
do away with this concurrence, therefore, is simply to do 
away entirely with the music and harmony of speech.—But 
perhaps this is not the right time to enlarge on these 
matters. 

72. It is the concurrence of long vowels which is most 
appropriately employed in the elevated style, as in the 


1 Scr. Inc. Cp. § 207 infra. 


σι 


10 


15 


20 


25 


106 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


nr yy » “ 
“λᾶαν ἄνω ὠθεσκε. καὶ γὰρ ὁ στίχος μῆκός τι ἔσχεν 
5 Las 4 Ν / lal / Ν > 
ἐκ τῆς συγκρούσεως, | Kal μεμίμηται τοῦ λίθου τὴν ava- 
φορὰν καὶ βίαν. ὡσαύτως καὶ τὸ “μὴ ἤπειρος εἶναι᾽ 
τὸ Θουκυδίδειον. συγκρούονται καὶ δίφθογγοι διφθόγ- 
« A , Ν a 5 ΝᾺ Ν 
γοις, “ταύτην κατῴκησαν μὲν Κερκυραῖοι: οἰκιστὴς δὲ 
3 ΄ ) 
ἐγένετο. 
a N > \ Q 35. ἘΝ N , 
73. Ποιεῖ μὲν οὖν καὶ τὰ αὐτὰ μακρὰ συγκρονυόμενα 
μέγεθος, καὶ αἱ αὐταὶ δίφθογγοι. αἱ δὲ ἐκ διαφερόντων 
, ε nw Ν ΄ “ Ν / > 
συγκρούσεις ὁμοῦ καὶ μέγεθος ποιοῦσιν Kal ποικιλίαν ἐκ 
ἴω 7 “Ὁ G2 2 ) 5 Ἂν ~ « ν ’ 5 / 
τῆς πολυηχίας, οἷον “ἠώς, ἐν δὲ τῷ “οἵην οὐ μόνον 
΄ Ν ’ ’ὔ 35 5 Ν Ν ε > ε Ν 
διαφέροντα τὰ γράμματά ἐστιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ οἱ ἦχοι ὁ μὲν 
δασύς, ὁ δὲ ψιλός, ὥστε πολλὰ ἀνόμοια εἶναι. 
74. Καὶ ἐν @odats δὲ τὰ μελίσματα ἐπὶ τοῦ ἑνὸς γίνεται 
an 3 lal Qn 72 Ὁ > lal ΕῚ 4 
τοῦ αὐτοῦ μακροῦ γράμματος, οἷον wdav ἐπεμβαλλομένων 
ᾧδαῖς, ὥστε ἡ τῶν ὁμοίων σύγκρουσις μικρὸν ἔσται τι 
δὴ ΄ Ν “λ XN Ν δΥ , \ 
MONS μέρος Kal μέλισμα. περὶ μὲν δὴ συγκρούσεως, καὶ 
ε ’ὔ » «ἃ \ vA - la} 
ὡς γίνοιτ᾽ ἂν μεγαλοπρεπὴς σύνθεσις, λελέχθω τοσαῦτα. 
» Ν ΔΝ ’ὔ Ν / ΓΝ 
75. ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἐν πράγμασι το μεγαλοπρεπές, αν 
/ Ν Ν / x ’ EN Ν 
μεγάλη καὶ διαπρεπὴς πεζομαχία ἢ ναυμαχία, ἢ περὶ 
5 ἴων x Ν “ , ε Ν “ ,’ὔ 5 4 
οὐρανοῦ ἢ περὶ γῆς λόγος: ὁ yap τοῦ μεγάλου ἀκούων 
, 3 Ν Ν Ν , » 4 / 
πράγματος εὐθὺς καὶ τὸν λέγοντα οἴεται μεγάλως λέγειν 
΄ A \ 3 Ν ΄ an 3 N a 
πλανώμενος: δεῖ yap οὐ τὰ λεγόμενα σκοπεῖν, ἀλλὰ πῶς 
λέγεται: ἔστι γὰρ καὶ μεγάλα μικρῶς λέγοντα ἀπρεπὲς 
a a , ὃ Ν \ ὃ , , C2 
ποιεῖν τῷ πράγματι. διὸ καὶ δεινούς τινάς φασιν, ὥσπερ 


Ν Ν 
καὶ Θεόπομπον, δεινὰ οὐ δεινῶς λέγοντας. 


I λάαν Ρ. 4 Θθουκυδίδιον Ρ. 8 καὶ... δίφθογγοι in rasura P. 10 τῆς 
οὐ πολυηχίας P: οὐ om. Victorius. 19 μεγαλ Ρ: fortasse μεγάλη ἢ legendum. 
21 καὶ λέγοντα P: τὸν add. edd. 25 λέγοντας] Hammerus, λέγοντα P. 


232. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 107 


words: ‘that rock he heaved uphillward’ (ἄνω ὠθεσκε)". 
The line, it may be said, is longer through the hiatus, and 
has actually reproduced the mighty heaving of the stone. 
The words of Thucydides ‘that it may not be attached to 
the mainland’ (μὴ ἤπειρος) furnish a similar example”. Diph- 
thongs also may clash with diphthongs, e.g. ‘the place was 
colonised from Corcyra; of Corinth, however, was its founder’ 
(Κερκυραῖοι οἰκιστής)". 

73. Well then, the concurrence of the same long vowels, 
and of the same diphthongs, contributes to elevation of style. 
On the other hand, the concurrence of different vowels 
produces, through the number of sounds employed, variety 
as well as elevation, an instance being the word ἠώς. In the 
word οἵην not only are the letters different but also the 
breathings, one being rough and the other smooth, so that 
there are here many points of unlikeness. 

74. In songs, too, trills can be made on one and the 
same long letter, songs being piled (so to say) on songs, 
so that the concurrence of like vowels may be regarded as 
a small part of a song and as a trill-—These remarks must 
suffice on the question of hiatus and of the kind of com- 
position appropriate to the elevated style. 

75. Elevation resides also in the nature of the subject- 
matter, when (for instance) the subject is a great and famous 
battle on land or sea, or when earth or heaven is the theme. 
The man who listens to a great subject is promptly beguiled 
into thinking that the discourse itself is great. ‘Beguiled, I 
say: for we must consider not so much the things narrated 
as the method of their narration, since great topics may be 
handled in a manner that is mean and below the dignity 
of the subject-matter. Whence the saying that there are 
forcible writers, like Theopompus, who give feeble utterance 
to forcible conceptions. 

1 Hom. Odyss. xi. 595, 

ἦ τοι ὁ μὲν σκηριπτόμενος χερσίν τε ποσίν τε 
λᾶαν ἄνω ὠθεσκε ποτὶ λόφον" ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε μέλλοι 
ἄκρον ὑπερβαλέειν, τότ᾽ ἀποστρέψασκε κραταιΐς" 
αὖτις ἔπειτα πέδονδε κυλίνδετο λᾶας ἀναιδής. 

2 Thucyd. vi. 1, διείργεται τὸ μὴ ἤπειρος εἶναι. 

3 Thucyd. i. 24, ταύτην ἀπῴκισαν μὲν Kepkupator, οἰκιστὴς δ᾽ ἐγένετο Φάλιος 
Κορίνθιος γένος τῶν ἀφ᾽ Ἡρακλέους. 


σι 


Io 


20 


25 


108 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


76. Νικίας δ᾽ ὁ ζωγράφος καὶ τοῦτο εὐθὺς ἔλεγεν 
εἶναι τῆς γραφικῆς τέχνης οὐ μικρὸν μέρος τὸ λαβόντα 
ὕλην εὐμεγέθη γράφειν, καὶ μὴ κατακερματίζειν τὴν 

4 > 4 ea > 4 xX » 5 > ε ’ὔ 
τέχνην εἰς μικρά, οἷον ὀρνίθια ἢ ἄνθη, ἀλλ᾽ ἱππομαχίας 

Ν / » \ Ν ΄ὕὔ ὕ > 
καὶ ναυμαχίας, ἔνθα πολλὰ μὲν σχήματα δείξειεν av τις 
ἵππων τῶν μὲν θεόντων, τῶν δὲ ἀνθισταμένων ὀρθῶν, 
ΕΝ 
ἄλλων δὲ ὀκλαζόντων, πολλοὺς δ᾽ ἀκοντίζοντας, πολλοὺς 
δὲ καταπίπτοντας τῶν ἱππέων: ᾧετο γὰρ καὶ τὴν ὑπόθεσιν 
αὐτὴν μέρος εἶναι τῆς ζωγραφικῆς τέχνης, ὥσπερ τοὺς 
μύθους τῶν ποιητῶν. οὐδὲν οὖν θαυμαστόν, εἰ καὶ ἐν 

lal Ν 
τοῖς λόγοις [καὶ] ἐκ πραγμάτων μεγάλων μεγαλοπρέπεια 
γένηται. 

77. Τὴν δὲ λέξιν ἐν τῷ χαρακτῆρι τούτῳ περιττὴν 
εἶναι δεῖ καὶ ἐξηλλαγμένην καὶ ἀσυνήθη μᾶλλον: οὕτω 
Ν ν Ν y+ ε Ν ,ὔ Ν 4 \ 4 
yap ἕξει τὸν ὄγκον, ἡ δὲ κυρία καὶ συνήθης σαφὴς μέν, 

Ν Ν \ 5 7) 
λειτὴ δὲ καὶ εὐκαταφρόνητος. 

78. Πρῶτα μὲν οὖν μεταφοραῖς χρηστέον: αὗται γὰρ 

᾽ὔ δὰ ε Ν ’,ὔ “ / Ν , 
μάλιστα καὶ ἡδονὴν συμβάλλονται τοῖς λόγοις Kal μέγε- 

δὰ ΄ a 5 , UA 5 Ν / 
os, μὴ μέντοι πυκναῖς, ἐπεί Tor διθύραμβον ἀντὶ λόγου 
γράφομεν: μήτε μὴν πόρρωθεν μετενηνεγμέναις, ἀλλ᾽ 
eh, \ 9 m ΤΕ , ® » 3 ΄ὕ 
αὐτόθεν καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ὁμοίον, οἷον ἔοικεν ἀλλήλοις στρατη- 
a » 
γός, κυβερνήτης, ἡνίοχος: πάντες γὰρ οὗτοι ἄρχοντές 
εἰσιν. ἀσφαλῶς οὖν ἐρεῖ καὶ ὁ τὸν στρατηγὸν κυβερ- 
ζ 4 lal / Ν 3 / ε Ν 4 
νήτην λέγων τῆς πόλεως, καὶ ἀνάπαλιν ὁ τὸν κυβερνήτην 
ἄρχοντα τῆς νηός. 
5 A / 5 , ν ε 

79. Οὐ πᾶσαι μέντοι ἀνταποδίδονται, ὥσπερ αἵ 

“4 > Ν Ν ε , A lal » 72 5 “ 
προειρημέναι, ἐπεὶ τὴν ὑπώρειαν μὲν τῆς Ἴδης πόδα ἐξῆν 
5 lal Ν 4 Ν Ν lal 3 ’ὔ / 5 4 
εἰπεῖν τὸν ποιητήν, τὸν δὲ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πόδα οὐκέτι 

ὑπώρειαν εἰπεῖν. 

1 νεικίας P. 3. εὐμεγέθει P. 6 θεώντων Ρ. 7 πολλοὺς δ᾽ ἀκοντί- 
ζοντας add. in margine P. 9 eva P. 11 καὶ secl. Spengelius. | μεγάλων 
scripsi Hammerum secutus: μεγάλη (ut videtur) in compend. P. 15 συνήθης: 
5 supra versum scripsit P. 16 λειτὴ) Spengelius, ἀεὶ τῆ P. 17 περὶ 


μεταφορᾶς καὶ παραβολῆς titulus in P. 20 μετενηνεγμένας Ρ. 27 ὑπώρειαν: 
w in rasura P. 


τὸ 


32 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 109 


76. The painter Nicias used to maintain that no small 
part of the artistic faculty was shown in the painter's choosing 
at the outset a subject of some amplitude, instead of dwarfing 
his art to small subjects, little birds (for example) or flowers. 
The right subjects, he said, were such as naval battles and 
cavalry engagements, which give an opportunity of intro- 
ducing many figures of horses running or rearing or sinking 
to the ground, and of horsemen falling earthward or dis- 
charging javelins. His view was that the subject itself was a 
part of the painter’s art, just as the ancient legends were 
a part of the art of poetry. So it need awaken no surprise 
that, in the province of style also, elevation results from the 
choice of a great subject. 

77. The diction used in this style should be grandiose, 
elaborate, and distinctly out of the ordinary. It will thus 
possess the needed gravity, whereas usual and current words, 
though clear, are unimpressive and liable to be held cheap. 

78. In the first place, then, metaphors must be used ; 
for they impart a special charm and grandeur to style. They 
should not be numerous, however; or we find ourselves 
writing dithyrambic poetry in place of prose. Nor yet 
should they be far-fetched, but natural and based on a true 
analogy. There is a resemblance, for instance, between a 
general, a pilot, and a charioteer; they are all in command. 
Accordingly it can correctly be said that a general pilots 
the State, and conversely that a pilot commands the ship. 

79. Not all metaphors can, however, be used convertibly 
like the above. Homer could call the lower slope of Ida its 


‘foot, but he could never have called a man’s foot his ‘slope’. 


1 Hom. 771. xx. 218, 


ἀλλ᾽ ἔθ᾽ ὑπωρείας ᾧκεον πολυπίδακος ᾿1δης. 


110 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


80. ᾿Ἐπὰν μέντοι κινδυνώδης ἡ μεταφορὰ δοκῇ, μετα- 
λαμβανέσθω εἰς εἰκασίαν: οὕτω γὰρ ἀσφαλεστέρα γίγνοιτ᾽ 
τ 3 ΄, 3 3 Ν Ν , ae » 
ἄν. εἰκασία δ᾽ ἐστὶ μεταφορὰ πλεονάζουσα, οἷον εἰ τις 

ἌΝ Ὁ / “ ll 50 A G.2? Cee, al’ ε ov’ π οσ 
τῷ “τότε τῷ Πύθωνι τῷ ῥήτορι ῥέοντι Kal vp ροσ- 

Ν » . ν cs > ε nw ? ν \ ἊΝ 

5 θεὶς εἴποι, “ὥσπερ ῥέοντι καθ᾽ ὑμῶν. οὕτω μὲν yap 
3 ΄, ΄ Ν 3 ΄ ε ΄, 3 / δὲ 
εἰκασία γέγονεν καὶ ἀσφαλέστερος ὁ λόγος, ἐκείνως OE 
Ν Ν 4 ἊΝ Ν ’ὔ > 
μεταφορὰ καὶ κινδυνωδέστερος. διὸ Kat Πλάτων ἐπι- 
͵΄ὕ' A rn an a 4 “Ὁ 
σφαλές τι δοκεῖ ποιεῖν μεταφοραῖς μᾶλλον χρώμενος ἢ 
> , ε , —_ a > , na 
εἰκασίαις, ὁ μέντοι Ξενοφῶν εἰκασίαις μᾶλλον. 
ιο ϑι. ᾿Αρίστη δὲ δοκεῖ μεταφορὰ τῷ ᾿Αριστοτέλει ἡ 
κατὰ ἐνέργειαν καλουμένη, ὅταν τὰ ἄψυχα ἐνεργοῦντα 

5 ᾽ὔ , » ε Ν 5 Ν la) / 

εἰσάγηται καθάπερ ἔμψυχα, ws τὸ ἐπὶ τοῦ βέλους: 
ὀξυβελὴς καθ᾽ ὅμιλον ἐπιπτέσθαι μενεαίνων, 
καὶ τὸ 
15 κυρτὰ φαληριόωντα. 

, Ν la) Ν « / ᾽ Ν Ν ‘ , ’ 
πάντα yap ταῦτα, TO “ φαληριόωντα καὶ TO “μενεαίνων, 
ζωτικαῖς ἐνεργείαις ἔοικεν. 

82. Ἔνια μέντοι σαφέστερον ἐν ταῖς μεταφοραῖς 
λέγεται καὶ κυριώτερον, ἥπερ ἐν αὐτοῖς τοῖς κυρίοις, ὡς 

Ἂν cy Ν ’,’ ) > Ν » 3 Ν Ν 

20 τὸ “ἔφριξεν δὲ μάχη. οὐ γὰρ ἂν τις αὐτὸ μεταβαλὼν 
Ν ΄ὔ yy 3 3 4 » 5, 4 Ἂν 
διὰ κυρίων οὔτ᾽ ἀληθέστερον εἴποι οὔτε σαφέστερον. τὸν 
γὰρ ἐκ τῶν δοράτων κλόνον καὶ τὸν γινόμενον τούτοις 
ἠρέμα ἦχον συνεχῶς φρίσσουσαν μάχην προσηγόρευσεν, 
καὶ ἅμα ἐπείληπταί πως τῆς κατ᾽ ἐνέργειαν μεταφορᾶς 
τῆς προειρημένης, τὴν μάχην φρίσσειν εἰπὼν ὥσπερ 

ζῶον. 

83. Δεῖ μέντοι μὴ λανθάνειν, ὅτι ἔνιαι μεταφοραὶ 


2 


σι 


΄ “ “ x ͵ ΄ nA 
μικροπρέπειαν ποιοῦσι μᾶλλον ἢ μέγεθος, καίτοι τῆς 
lal + 
μεταφορᾶς πρὸς ὄγκον λαμβανομένης, ws τὸ 
30 ἀμφὶ δ᾽ ἐσαλπιγξεν μέγας οὐρανός" 
3. δ᾽] Victorius, ἀλλ᾽ Ρ. 4 τῷ ante τότε add. Galeus. | Πύθωνι τῷ supra 
versum add. P. 13 ἐπιπτέσθαι ex ἐπιπταίσθαι (ut videtur) P. 19 εἴπερ P. 


20 on τί φησιν περὶ τοῦ ἔφριξεν δὲ μάχη in margine P. | μεταβαλῶν P. 22 καὶ 
τὸν ins. Spengelius. 23 npéua P. 24 ἐπίληπται P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STVLE III 


80. When the metaphor seems daring, let it for greater 
security be converted into a simile. A simile is an expanded 
metaphor, as when, instead of saying ‘the orator Python was 
then rushing upon you in full flood, we add a word of 
comparison and say ‘was like a flood rushing upon you’, 
In this way we obtain a simile and a less risky expression, in 
the other way metaphor and greater danger. Plato’s em- 
ployment of metaphors rather than similes is, therefore, to be 
regarded as a risky feature of his style. Xenophon, on the 
other hand, prefers the simile. 

81. In Aristotle’s* judgment the so-called ‘active’ meta- 
phor is the best, wherein inanimate things are introduced in a 
state of activity as though they were animate, as in the 
passage describing the shaft: 

Leapt on the foemen the arrow keen-whetted with eager wing’, 


and in the words: 
High-arched foam-crested*. 


All such expressions as ‘foam-crested’ and ‘eager wing’ 
suggest the activities of living creatures. 

82. Some things are, however, expressed with greater 
clearness and precision by means of metaphors than by 
means of the precise terms themselves: eg. ‘the battle 
shuddered’ No change of phrase could, by the employ- 
ment of precise terms, give the meaning with greater truth 
and clearness. The poet has given the designation of ‘shud- 
dering battle’ to the clash of spears and the low and continu- 
ous sound which these make. In so doing he has seized upon 
the aforesaid ‘active’ metaphor and has represented the battle 
as ‘shuddering’ like a living thing. 

83. We must, however, not lose sight of the fact that 
some metaphors conduce to triviality rather than to grandeur, 
even though the metaphor be employed in order to enhance 
the effect. An instance is the line: 


And with thunder-trumpet pealing the boundless heaven rang 


round®. 
1 Demosth. de Cor. 136. 2 Aristot. Ret. ili. 11. 
3 Hom. Z/. iv. 126. 4 Hom. 77]. xiii. 798. 


> Hom. 71. xiii. 339. 6 Hom. 71. xxi. 388. 


112 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


οὐρανὸν γὰρ ὅλον ἠχοῦντα οὐκ EXPHY προσεικάσαι ἠχούσῃ 
σάλπιγγι, πλὴν εἰ μή τις ἄρα ἀπολογοῖτο ὑπὲρ τοῦ 
ε Y 
Ομήρου λέγων, ὡς οὕτως ἤχησεν μέγας οὐρανός, ὡς ἂν 
ἠχήσειεν σαλπίζων ὅλος οὐρανός. 

8 ε 72 ον 5 ΄ ἊΝ , 

5 4. ‘Erépay οὖν ἐπινοήσωμεν μεταφορὰν μικρότητος 
αἰτίαν γινομένην μᾶλλον ἢ μεγέθους: δεῖ γὰρ ἐκ τῶν 
μειζόνων μεταφέρειν εἰς τὰ μικρά, οὐ τὸ ἐναντίον, οἷον 
ε ε — lol ¢ 5 \ δὲ 4 > 4 la 
as 0 Ξενοφῶν φησιν, “ἐπεὶ δὲ πορευομένων ἐξεκύμηνέ 
τι τῆς φάλαγγος. τὴν γὰρ τῆς τάξεως παρεκτροπὴν 

το ἐκκυμαινούσῃ θαλάσσῃ εἴκασεν καὶ προσωνόμασεν. εἰ 
δέ \ » 5 lA Ν 4 
έ τις μεταβαλὼν εἴποι ἐκφαλαγγίσασαν τὴν θάλασσαν, 
τάχα μὲν οὐδὲ οἰκείως μετοίσει, πάντη δὲ πάντως μικρο- 
πρεπῶς. 

85. Ἔνιοι δὲ καὶ ἀσφαλίζονται τὰς μεταφορὰς ἐπι- 
72 3 ΄ Ψ 3 A 4 “ 

15 θέτοις ἐπιφερομένοις, ὅταν αὐτοῖς κινδυνώδεις δοκῶσιν, 
ε ε 4 / a / © / »” > 
ὡς ὁ Θέογνις παρατίθεται TO τόξῳ “φόρμιγγα ἀἄχορδον 
ΕῚ Ν an qn ͵7ὔ / ε Ν δὰ 7 
ἐπὶ τοῦ τῷ τόξῳ βάλλοντος: ἡ μὲν γὰρ φόρμιγξ κινδυ- 

ay SEN “ ἕ a δὲ > , ὃ 3 or 
νῶδες ἐπὶ τοῦ τόξου, τῷ δὲ ἀχόρδῳ ἠσφάλισται. 
86. Πάντων δὲ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἡ συνήθεια καὶ 
’ὔ an / lal Ν Ν 
"ομάλιστα μεταφορῶν διδάσκαλος: μικροῦ γὰρ σχεδὸν 
΄ὕ , , \ YQ 2 na , 
πάντα μεταφέρουσα λανθάνει διὰ τὸ ἀσφαλῶς μεταφέρειν, 
λ ΄ Ν λέ | Ν ὀξὺ ey 0 Ν Ν 
evkny τε φωνὴν λέγουσα καὶ ὀξὺν ἀνθρωπον καὶ τραχὺ 
> Ν Ν G2 Ν 4 Ψ Y , 
ἦθος καὶ μακρὸν ῥήτορα Kal τάλλα, ὅσα οὕτω μεταφέρε- 
ται μουσικῶς, ὥστε ὅμοια δοκεῖν τοῖς κυρίοις. 
na > N , , an 3 , 
25 87. Τοῦτον ἐγὼ κανόνα τίθεμαι τῆς ἐν λόγοις μετα- 
nan na » yg rn 
φορᾶς, τὴν τῆς συνηθείας τέχνην ETE φύσιν. οὕτω γοῦν 
ἔνια μετήνεγκεν ἡ συνήθεια καλῶς, ὥστε οὐδὲ κυρίων 
» > ΄ 3 δ , ε Q , 
ἔτι ἐδεήθημεν, ἀλλὰ μεμένηκεν ἡ μεταφορὰ κατέχουσα 
Ν lal / / ε cc lal 5 ΄ 3 θ Ν ) Ν 
τὸν τοῦ κυρίου τόπον, ὡς “ὁ τῆς ἀμπέλου ὀφθαλμὸς᾽ καὶ 


ο Ἶ 3 
30 εἴ TL ἕτερον τοιοῦτον. 


2 ἄρα] edd., ἅμα P. 3 ὡς οὕτως] ap. Greg. Cor., ὡσαύτως P. | ὡραῖον et 
ὅμηρος in margine P. 8 πορευομένω P. 9 τι τῆς Xenophontis libri: τῆς P. 
16 τῷ τόξῳ φόρμιγγα] Nauckius, τὸν τοξοφόρμιγγα Ῥ. 18 τὸ de P. 20 δῇ 
delendum σχεδὸν ? 22 λέγουσαν et τραχὺν (vy utroque punctis notato) P. 


233° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 113 


The entire firmament when resounding ought not to have 
been likened to a resounding trumpet, unless on Homer’s 
behalf the defence be advanced that high heaven resounded 
in the way in which the entire heaven would resound were it 
trumpeting. 

84. Let us, therefore, consider a different kind of meta- 
phor, one which leads to pettiness rather than to grandeur. 
Metaphors should be applied from the greater to the less, not 
the other way about. Xenophon, for example, says: ‘on the 
march a part of the line surged out!’ He thus likens a 
swerving from the ranks to a surging of the sea, and applies 
this term to it. If, however, it were conversely to be said that 
the sea swerved from ‘line, the metaphor would possibly not 
be even appropriate ; in any case it would be utterly trivial. 

85. Some writers endeavour by the addition of epithets 
to safeguard metaphors which they consider risky. In this 
way Theognis applies to the bow the expression ‘lyre without 
chords’ when describing an archer in the act of shooting’. It 
is a bold thing to apply the term ‘lyre’ to a bow, but the 
metaphor is guarded by the qualification ‘ without chords.’ 

86. Usage, which is our teacher everywhere, is so 
particularly in regard to metaphors. Usage, in fact, clothes 
almost all conceptions in metaphor, and that with such a sure 
touch that we are hardly conscious of it. It calls a voice 
‘silvery,’ a man ‘keen,’ a character ‘rugged,’ a speaker ‘long,’ 
and so on with metaphors in general, which are applied so 
tastefully that they pass for literal description. 

87. My own rule for the use of metaphor in composi- 
tion is the art—or nature—found in usage. Metaphors have 
in some cases been so well established by usage that we no 
longer require the literal expressions, but the metaphor has 
definitely usurped the place of the literal term. For instance, 
‘the eye of the vine, and so forth. 


1 Xen. Azad. i. 8, 18, ws δὲ πορευομένων ἐξεκύμαινέ τι τῆς φάλαγγος. 
2 Theog. trag., Nauck?, p. 769. 


R. 8 


114 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


88. Σῴφόνδυλος μέντοι καὶ κλεὶς τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ σώματος, 

ἊΝ »,᾽ 5 Ν Ν 5 4 5 Ν » 
καὶ κτένες, οὐ κατὰ μεταφορὰν ὠνόμασται, ἀλλὰ καθ 
ε / Ν ΑΝ 5 ’ὕ ςν Ν Ν ᾽ὕ Ν Ἂς 
ὁμοιότητα διὰ τὸ ἐοικέναι τὸ μὲν κτενὶ μέρος, τὸ δὲ 
κλειδί, τὸ δὲ σφονδύλῳ. 


3 Ν / > / “ Ν / 
89. “Evav μέντοι εἰκασίαν ποιῶμεν τὴν μεταφοράν, 


tn 


ὡς προλέλεκται, TTOXATTEOY τοῦ συντόμου, Kal TOU μηδὲν 
-“ ν 
πλέον τοῦ “ὥσπερ᾽ προτιθέναι, ἐπεί τοι ἀντ᾽ εἰκασίας 
NY. , - Ν a — las ou”. 
παραβολὴ ἔσται ποιητική, οἷον TO τοῦ Ξενοφῶντος, “ὥσπερ 
δὲ κύων γενναῖος ἀπρονοήτως ἐπὶ κάπρον φέρεται, καὶ 
Coe: ν Ν Ν / A Ν 5 
10 “WOTEP ἵππος huOets διὰ πεδίου γαυριῶν καὶ ἀπολακ- 
4 ») »-:Ο Ν 5 5 4 » » » Ν 
τίζων" ταῦτα γὰρ οὐκ εἰκασίαις ETL ἔοικεν, ἀλλὰ παρα- 
βολαῖς ποιητικαῖς. 
90. Τὰς δὲ παραβολὰς ταύτας οὔτε ῥᾳδίως ἐν τοῖς 
πεζοῖς λόγοις τιθέναι δεῖ, οὗτε ἄνευ πλείστης φυλακῆς. 
\ Ν lo) \ Lal ¢ 4 5 Lal 
15 καὶ περὶ μεταφορᾶς μὲν τοσαῦτα ὡς τύπῳ εἰπεῖν. 
Ν 
QI. Ληπτέον δὲ καὶ σύνθετα ὀνόματα, οὐ τὰ διθυραμ.- 
βικῶς συγκείμενα, οἷον " θεοτεράτους πλάνας, οὐδὲ “ἄστρων 
δορύπυρον στρατόν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐοικότα τοῖς ὑπὸ τῆς συνηθείας 
συγκειμένοις: καθόλου γὰρ ταύτην κανόνα ποιοῦμαι πάσης 
20 ὀνομασίας, νομοθέτας λέγουσαν καὶ ἀρχιτέκτονας, καὶ 
τοιάδε πολλὰ ἕτερα ἀσφαλῶς συντιθεῖσαν. 
ν ᾽ὔ Ν 4 »~ ε Lal ἊΝ 7) 
92. Ἥξει μέντοι τὸ σύνθετον ὄνομα ὁμοῦ καὶ ποικιλίαν 
an ν Ν 
τινὰ ἐκ τῆς συνθέσεως καὶ μέγεθος, καὶ ἅμα καὶ συντο- 
μίαν τινά. ὄνομα γὰρ τεθήσεται ἀντὶ ὅλου τοῦ λόγου, 
= an Ν / Ν 
25 οἷον ἂν τὴν τοῦ σίτου κομιδὴν σιτοπομπίαν λέγῃς" πολὺ 
Ν Ψ a , δ᾽ Py Ν λ θέ 3 / > 
yap οὕτω μεῖζον. τάχα δ᾽ ἂν καὶ λυθέντος ὀνόματος εἰς 
9 rn a 4 ἂν 
λόγον ἕτερον τρόπον μεῖζον γένοιτο, οἷον σίτου πομπὴ 
ἀντὶ σιτοπομπίας. 
93. Ὄνομα δ᾽ ἀντὶ λόγου τίθεται, οἷον ὡς ὁ Ξενοφῶν 
Ψ ΕῚ > lal A A 5 Ν ε ε lal 
30 φησιν ὅτι οὐκ ἦν λαβεῖν ὄνον ἀγριον, εἰ μὴ OL ὑππεῖς 
4 “ / Ξ > , a 7 ε Ν 
διαστάντες θηρῷεν διαδεχόμενοι: ὀνόματι, οἷον OTL οἱ μὲν 


6 τοῦ μηδὲ τὸ P, μηδὲν πλέον τοῦ ἴῃ margine Ρ. 14 ἄνευ ἴῃ τα5. P. 15 τοσαῦτα 
add. Schneiderus. 16 περὶ συνθέτων ὀνομάτων titulus (post φυλακῆς positus) in P. 
17 πλάνας: ἃ supra π᾿ scripsit P. 18 συνηθείας) Finckhius, ἀληθείας P. 
22 καὶ supra versum add. P. 29 ὄναμα P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 115 


88. The parts of the body, however, which are called 
‘vertebra’ (σῴφόνδυλος), ‘collar-bone’ (κλείς), and ‘ribs’ 
(κτένες), derive their names not from metaphor but from their 
resemblance to a spindle-whorl, a key, and a comb respect- 
ively. 

89. When we turn a metaphor into a simile in the way 
above described, we must aim at conciseness. We must 
do no more than prefix some such word as ‘like, or we 
shall have a poetical image in place of a simile. Take, for 
example, the following passage of Xenophon: ‘like as a 
gallant hound charges a boar recklessly, and ‘like as a horse 
when untethered bounds proudly prancing over the plain!’ 
Such descriptions have the appearance not of simile but 
of poetical imagery. 

90. These images should not be used in prose lightly 
nor without the greatest caution.—This concludes our sketch 
of the subject of metaphor. 

91. Compound words should also be used. They should 
not, however, be formed after the manner of the dithyrambic 
poets, e.g. ‘heaven-prodigied wanderings’ or ‘the fiery-speared 
battalions of the stars’ They should resemble the com- 
pounds made in ordinary speech. In all word-formation I 
regard usage as the universal arbiter, usage which speaks 
of ‘law-givers’ and ‘master-builders, and with sure touch 
frames many other compounds of the kind. 

92. A compound word will usually, from the very fact 
that it is composite, derive a certain decorative quality and 
grandeur, and a certain pith as well. One word will stand for 
an entire phrase. For instance, you might speak of the 
transport of corn as ‘corn-convoy, thus using a much more 
striking expression. Still, it may sometimes happen that the 
same strengthened effect will be obtained by the converse 
process of resolving a word into a phrase—‘corn-convoy,’ for 
instance, into ‘convoy of corn.’ 

93. An example of a word used instead of a phrase is 
Xenophon’s sentence: ‘it was not possible to capture a wild- 
ass unless the horsemen posted themselves at intervals and 
gave chase in relays’ The single word (διαδεχόμενοι) is 

1 Xen. Cyrop. 1. 4, 21. ? Lyric. Fragm. Adesp. 128, Bergk4. 

3 Xen. Anad.i. 5, 2. 


8—2 


fe) 


~ 
σι 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


116 AHMHTPIOY TEP) EPMHNEIAZ 


» 507 ε 9.55 ΄ ε ΄ ΄ Ψ 
ὄπισθεν ἐδίωκον, οἵ δ᾽ ἀπήντων ὑπελαύνοντες πρόσω, ὥστε 
τὸν ὄνον ἐν μέσῳ ἀπολαμβάνεσθαι. φυλάττεσθαι μέντοι 
διπλᾶ τιθέναι τὰ διπλᾶ ὀνόματα: τοῦτο γὰρ ἔξεισι λόγου 
πεζοῦ τὸ εἶδος. 
Ν Ν 4 > 7, ε ,ὔ \ Ν Ν 
94. Τὰ δὲ πεποιημένα ὀνόματα ὁρίζονται μὲν τὰ κατὰ 
μίμησιν ἐκφερόμενα πάθους ἢ πράγματος, οἷον ὡς τὸ 
“σίζε᾽ | καὶ τὸ “λάπτοντες, (95) ποιεῖ δὲ μάλιστα μεγαλο- 
2? Ν Ν eS / 5 ΄ Ν ΄ A 
πρέπειαν διὰ τὸ οἷον ψόφοις ἐοικέναι, καὶ μάλιστα τῷ 
ξένῳ: 5 Ν 7 > / λέ LANA / / 
ἔνῳ: οὐ yap ὄντα ὀνόματα λέγει, ἀλλὰ τότε γινόμενα, 
Y / , 2 2 a / @ 
καὶ aa σοφόν τι φαίνεται ὀνόματος καινοῦ γένεσις, οἷον 
συνηθείας: ἔοικεν γοῦν ὀνοματουργῶν τοῖς πρώτοις θε- 
μένοις τὰ ὀνόματα. 
6. Στοχαστέον πρῶτον μὲν τοῦ σαφοῦς ἐν τῷ 
go. =ToX ρ μεν του σαάφους ἐν TW ποιου- 
μένῳ ὀνόματι καὶ συνήθους, ἔπειτα τῆς ὁμοιότητος πρὸς 
Ἂν fp 5 / ε Ν 7 “Ὁ ’ὕ 
τὰ κείμενα ὀνόματα, ὡς μὴ φρυγίζειν ἢ σκυθίζειν τις 
δόξει μεταξὺ Ἑλληνικῶν ὀνομάτων. 
, , 3» N \ 3 ΄ aq ε 
97. Ποιητέον μέντοι ἤτοι τὰ μὴ ὠνομασμένα, οἷον ὃ 
Ν , Ν BA ἴω “μ" ΕἾ) , 
τὰ τύμπανα Kal τάλλα τῶν μαλθακῶν ὄργανα κιναιδίας 
> Ν Ν 3 / Ν > ΄ “Ὁ Ν Ν 
εἰπὼν καὶ ᾿Αριστοτέλης τὸν ἐλεφαντιστήν: ἢ παρὰ τὰ 
κείμενα παρονομάζοντα αὐτόν, οἷον ὡς τὸν σκαφίτην τις 
» Ν Ν , 5 lA Ν 3 4 Ν 
ἔφη τὸν τὴν σκάφην ἐρέσσοντα, καὶ ᾿Αριστοτέλης τὸν 
αὐτίτην οἷον τὸν μόνον αὐτὸν ὄντα. 
ο8. Ξενοφῶν δὲ “ἠλέλιξέ᾽ φησιν “ὁ στρατός, τὴν τοῦ 
3 “ 5 / a 5 / ε Ν n 
ἐλελεῦ ἀναβόησιν ἣν ἀνεβόα ὁ στρατὸς συνεχῶς Tapa- 
’ὔὕ 5 LZ > Ν 4 > ε » 
ποιήσας ὀνόματι. ἐπισφαλὲς μέντοι τοὔργον, ὡς ἔφην, 
καὶ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ποιηταῖς. καὶ τὸ διπλοῦν μέντοι ὄνομα 
εἶδος ἂν εἴη πεποιημένου ὀνόματος: πᾶν γὰρ τὸ συντι- 


θέμενον ἔκ τινων), γέγονεν δηλονότι. 


3 ἔξεισι] Victorius, ἔξει P. 16 Ἑλληνικῶν ὀνομάτων] edd., Ἑλληνικοῖς 
ὀνόμασιν Ῥ. 18 μαρθάκων Ρ. 20 τὸ σκαφίτην Ῥ. 23 ἠλέλιξε] Victorius, 
ἤλλαξεν P. | στρατός] Victorius, στρατηγὸς Ρ. 24. στρατὸς] Victorius, 


στρατηγὸς Ρ. 25 ws] Victorius, καὶ ὡς P. 


233° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 117 


equivalent to saying that those in the rear were pursuing, 
while the others rode forward to meet them, so that the wild 
ass was intercepted. The compounding of words already 
compounded should, however, be avoided. Such double 
composition oversteps the limits of prose-writing. 

94. Our authorities define ‘onomatopoeic’ words as 
those which are uttered in imitation of an emotion or an 
action, as ‘hissed’ and ‘lapping’, 

95. Homer impresses his hearers greatly by the em- 
ployment of words descriptive of inarticulate sounds, and 
by their novelty above all. He is not making use of 
existing words, but of words which were then coming into 
existence. Moreover, the creation of a fresh word analogous 
to words already in use is regarded as a kind of poetic gift. 
As a word-maker, Homer seems, in fact, to resemble those 
who first gave things their names. 

96. The foremost aim in the formation of words should 
be clearness and naturalness; the next, due analogy with 
established words. A writer should not have the appearance 
of introducing Phrygian or Scythian words among those of 
Greece. 

97. Words should be formed either to denote things 
which have as yet not been named, as was done by the 
person who described the kettledrums and other instruments 
of effeminate devotees as ‘lecheries,’ or by Aristotle when he 
spoke of an ‘elephanteer’ (elephant-driver)?, Or again, a 
writer may independently fashion words from existing ones, 
as when someone gave the name of ‘boatman’ to one who 
rows a boat, or as when Aristotle called a man who lives by 
himself a ‘solitary*’ 

98. Xenophon says that ‘the army huzzaed,’ denoting 
by this derivative the cry of ‘huzza’ which the troops kept 
raising continually*, The practice is, however, as I said, full 
of risk even for the poets themselves. It may be added that 
a compound is a kind of manufactured word, everything 
which is put together springing manifestly from certain 
existing material. 

1 Hom. Odyss. ix. 394; Z/. xvi. 161. 


? Aristot. Wzst. Anim. Book ii. (1. pp. 497, 610, ed. Berol.). 
3 Cp. § 144 infra. 4 Xen. Anab. v. 2, 14. 


Io 


20 


2 


σι 


σι 


118 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


99. Μεγαλεῖον δέ τί ἐστι καὶ ἡ ἀλληγορία, Kal 
, 5 la 5 lo - ε ε , ν ra ε 
μάλιστα ἐν ταῖς ἀπειλαῖς, οἷον ὡς ὁ Διονύσιος, ὅτι ‘ot 
A ¥ 
τέττιγες αὐτοῖς ᾷσονται χαμόθεν. 
100. Εἰ δ᾽ οὕτως ἁπλῶς εἶπεν, ὅτι τεμεῖ τὴν Λοκρίδα 
, Ν 5 4 “Δ 5 ’, Ν 5 4 ἴω 
χώραν, καὶ ὀργιλώτερος ἂν ἐφάνη καὶ εὐτελέστερος. νῦν 
ν n wn 
δὲ ὥσπερ συγκαλύμματι τοῦ λόγου τῇ ἀλληγορίᾳ κέχρη- 
ται: πᾶν γὰρ τὸ ὑπονοούμενον φοβερώτερον, καὶ ἄλλος 
εἰκάζει ἄλλο τι: ὃ δὲ σαφὲς καὶ φανερόν, καταφρονεῖσθαι 
[2 
εἰκός, ὥσπερ τοὺς ἀποδεδυμένους. 
IOI. Διὸ καὶ τὰ μυστήρια ἐν ἀλληγορίαις λέγεται 
Ν » Ν 4 9 5 i) Ν ,ὔ 
πρὸς ἔκπληξιν καὶ φρίκην, ὥσπερ ἐν σκότῳ καὶ νυκτί. 
3», Ν ἊΝ ε 5 4 A ,ὔ Ν ἊΝ ᾽ὕ 
ἔοικε δὲ καὶ ἡ ἀλληγορία τῷ σκότῳ καὶ τῇ νυκτί. 
102. Φυλάττεσθαι μέντοι κἀπὶ ταύτης τὸ συνεχές, 
» nw ea n 
ὡς μὴ αἴνιγμα ὁ λόγος ἡμῖν γένηται, οἷον τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς 
σικύας τῆς ἰατρικῆς" 


? 5 
ἄνδρ᾽ εἶδον πυρὶ χαλκὸν ἐπ᾽ ἀνέρι κολλήσαντα. 


καὶ οἱ Λάκωνες πολλὰ ἐν ἀλληγορίαις ἔλεγον ἐκφοβοῦντες, 
οἷον τὸ “Διονύσιος ἐν Κορίνθῳ᾽ πρὸς Φίλιππον, καὶ ἄλλα 
τοιαῦτα οὐκ ὀλίγα. 

103. “H συντομία δὲ πῆ μὲν μεγαλοπρεπής, καὶ 
μάλιστα ἡ ἀποσιώπησις: ἔνια γὰρ μὴ ῥηθέντα μείζονα 
φαίνεται καὶ ὑπονοηθέντα μᾶλλον: mH δὲ μικροπρεπής. 

Ν Ν > ’ὔ / 4 ΩΣ ε — La 
Kal yap ev διλογίαις γίνεται μέγεθος, οἷον ὡς Zevopar, 
CEN δὲ ν 3 ΄ ? ΄ « Ν X ὃ > τὰ la 
Ta δὲ ἅρματα ἐφέρετο, φησί, “τὰ μὲν Ov αὐτῶν τῶν 

,, \ \ Ἂν > > “ lal 4 ? Ν Ν 
φιλίων, τὰ δὲ καὶ dv αὐτῶν τῶν πολεμίων. πολὺ γὰρ 

΄ A “Δ » ΩΡ» > © \ Ν a ΄,ὔ Ν 
οὕτω μεῖζον, ἣ εἴπερ ὧδ᾽ εἶπεν, “καὶ διὰ τῶν φιλίων, καὶ 
διὰ τῶν πολεμίων αὐτῶν." 

104. | Πολλαχοῦ δὲ καὶ τὸ πλάγιον μεῖζον τοῦ εὐθέος, 
Ὁ ΓΞ: Χ ΄ > ε 3 Ν ΄, va ε , 
οἷον “ἡ δὲ γνώμη ἦν, ws εἰς Tas τάξεις τῶν Ἑλλήνων 


2 δυονύσιος P. 3 ἀρῶνται P| χαμάθεν Ρ. 4 τέμει P. 6 ὡραῖον 
in margine P. 8 φανερὸν] Goellerus, φοβερὸν P. 11 σκότῳ] Victorius, 
αυτῶ Ρ. | ἴσως ἐν ἀδύτῳ m. rec. in marg. P. 12 σκότῳ] Victorius, αὐτῷ P. 


15 συκίας P. 16 ἄνδρα P. | πυρίχαλκον Ῥ. 


234" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 119 


99. There is a kind of impressiveness also in allegorical 
language. This is particularly true of such menaces as that 
of Dionysius : ‘their cicalas shall chirp from the ground.’ 

100. If Dionysius had expressed his meaning directly, 
saying that he would ravage the Locrian land, he would have 
shown at once more irritation and less dignity. In the phrase 
actually used the speaker has shrouded his words, as it were, 
in allegory. Any darkly-hinting expression is more terror- 
striking, and its import is variously conjectured by different 
hearers. On the other hand, things that are clear and plain 
are apt to be despised, just like men when stripped of their 
garments. 

101. Hence the Mysteries are revealed in an allegorical 
form in order to inspire such shuddering and awe as are 
associated with darkness and night. Allegory also is not 
unlike darkness and night. 

102. Here again excess must be avoided, lest language 
become a riddle in our hands, as in the description of the 
surgeon’s cupping-glass :-— 


A man I beheld who with fire had welded brass to a man’s flesh’. 


The Lacedaemonians conveyed many of their threats by 
means of allegory, as in the message ‘ Dionysius at Corinth’ 
addressed to Philip, and in many similar expressions’. 

103. In certain cases conciseness, and especially aposio- 
pesis, produce elevation, since some things seem to be more 
significant when not expressed but only hinted at. In other 
cases, however, triviality is the result. Impressiveness may 
result from repetitions such as those of Xenophon, who 
says: ‘the chariots rushed, some of them right through the 
ranks of friends, others right through the ranks of foes*’ 
Such a sentence is far more striking than if Xenophon had 
put it in this way: ‘right through the ranks both of friends 
and foes.’ 

104. Often the indirect expression is more impressive 
than the direct: e.g.-the intention was that they should charge 


1 See note on Proverbs. 2 Cleobulina, fragm. 1, Bergk*. 
3 See note on Proverbs. 4 Xen. “πα. i. 8, 20. 


120 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


ἐλώντων Kal διακοψόντων᾽ ἀντὶ τοῦ “" διενοοῦντο ἐλάσαι 
Ν / ᾽ 
καὶ διακόψαι. 
105. Συμβέβλητωι δὲ καὶ ἡ ὁμοιότης τῶν ὀνομάτων 
Ν ε 4 ε 4 Ν Ν Ν 4 
καὶ ἡ δυσφωνία ἡ φαινομένη: Kai yap τὸ δύσφωνον πολ- 
5 λαχοῦ ὀγκηρόν, ὥσπερ 


Αἴας δ᾽ ὁ μέγας αἰὲν ἐφ᾽ “Exropu. 


Ν Ν a Ν » 4 Sey e lan 
πολὺ yap μᾶλλον τὸν Αἴαντα μέγαν ἐνέφηνεν ἡ τῶν 
, 4 fa ε / > / 
δύο σύμπλη ξις τῆς ἑπταβοείου ἀσπίδος. 
» 
106. Τὸ δὲ ἐπιφώνημα καλούμενον ὁρίζοιτο μὲν av 
ἴοτις λέξιν ἐπικοσμοῦσαν, ἔστι δὲ τὸ μεγαλοπρεπέστατον 
3 A / a Ν ΄ «ς Ν ε las ε \ 
ἐν τοῖς λόγοις. τῆς yap λέξεως ἡ μὲν ὑπηρετεῖ, ἡ δὲ 
ἐπικοσμεῖ. ὑπηρετεῖ μὲν ἡ τοιάδε, 
“ \ (2 “ ᾽ " / Vv 
Olav ταν ὑάκινθον εν ουρεσι ποιμενες ἄνδρες 
ποσσὶ καταστείβουσιν, 


3 “ Ν ἊΝ 5 / ‘\ 
15 ἐπικοσμεῖ δὲ TO ἐπιφερόμενον TO 
χαμαὶ δέ τε πορφύρον ἄνθος" 


> 4 ἊΝ lal aA 4 / aA 
ἐπενήνεκται γὰρ τοῦτο τοῖς TPOEVNVEYMEVOLS KOT MOS σαφῶς 
Ν ΄, 
καὶ κάλλος. 
Ν \ ΄ “ GG ΄ ΄ Ὁ 
107. Μεστὴ δὲ τούτων καὶ ἡ Ὁμήρου ποίησις, οἷον 
3 an / 9; 3, Ν 3 / lal af 
20 ἐκ καπνοῦ κατέθηκ᾽, ἐπεὶ οὐκέτι τοῖσιν ἐῴκει, 

οἷς τὸ πάρος Τροίηνδε κιὼν κατέλειπεν ᾿Οδυσσεύς. 
πρὸς δ᾽ ἔτι καὶ τόδε μεῖζον ἐπὶ φρεσὶν ἔμβαλε δαίμων, 
μήπως οἰνωθέντες, ἔριν στήσαντες ἐν ὑμῖν, 
ἀλλήλους τρώσητε. 


> > a 
25 εἶτα ἐπιφωνεῖ, 
αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐφέλκεται ἄνδρα σίδηρος. 
lal “ 2? 
108. Kat καθόλου τὸ ἐπιφώνημα τοῖς TOV πλουσίων 
I ἐλώντων»] Xen. libri, ἐλθόντων P. 9. ὅρος φωνήματος in marg. P. 


13 οὔρεσιν P. | ποιμένες supra versum add. P. 14 ποσὶ P. 21 στροί- 
ηνδε Ρ. 25 ὡραῖον in margine P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 121 


the ranks of the Greeks and cut their way through them’ rather 
than ‘they intended to charge and cut their way through’. 

105. Similarity of words and obvious harshness of sound 
may contribute to the same result. Harshness of sound is 
often effective, as in the words 

And Alias the mighty at Hector the brazen-helmed evermore 
Was aiming his lance’. 
The concurrence of the two words (Αἴας, αἰέν) gives a far more 
vivid impression of the greatness of Ajax than even his 
famous sevenfold buckler. 

106. The so-called ‘epiphoneme’ may be defined as 
‘diction that adorns. It produces elevation of style in the 
highest degree. Some parts of diction simply subserve the 
thought, while others embellish it. Of the former the follow- 
ing is an example :— 

Like the hyacinth-flower, that shepherd folk ’mid the mountains tread 
Underfoot. 
The embellishment comes with the added clause :— 

and low on the earth her bloom dark-splendid is shed’. 


The addition thus made to the preceding lines clearly adorns 
and beautifies. 
107. The poetry of Homer abounds in instances, e.g. 


“I have taken them out of the smoke,’ say thou, ‘for they seem 
no more 

Like those that Odysseus left when he sailed for the Trojan shore, 

But marred, wherever the wreaths of the fire-reek were wont to roll. 

And another fear and a greater Cronion hath put in my soul, 

Lest perchance ye be heated with wine, and ye break into strife 
and jar, 

And ye wound one another, and shame the feast, and your wooing 


TEATS 


After this he adds as a finishing-touch :— 

For the steel of itself hath a spell and it draweth men on unto 
war “.᾿ 

108. In general it may be said that the epiphoneme 

1 Xen. Azad. i. 8, το. 2 Hom. 71. xvi. 358. 

3 Sappho Fragm. 94, Bergk4. 4 Hom. Odyss. xix. 7: cp. xvi. 288. 


10 


I 


on 


20 


25 


30 


122 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


» 5 ’, ’, 4 Ν - Ν 
ἔοικεν ἐπιδείγμασιν, γείσοις λέγω καὶ τριγλύφοις καὶ 
πορφύραις πλατείαις: οἷον γάρ τι καὶ αὐτὸ τοῦ ἐν λόγοις 
πλούτου σημεῖόν ἐστιν. 

100. Δόξειεν δ᾽ ἂν καὶ τὸ ἐνθύμημα ἐπιφωνήματος 
ἴδό > 5 Ἃ ΄ > Ν ΄ ν > Ν 
εἶδός τι εἶναι, οὐκ ὃν μέν: οὐ γὰρ κόσμου ἕνεκεν, ἀλλὰ 
> 7 / Ν > fp /, 3 
ἀποδείξεως παραλαμβάνεται, πλὴν ἐπιλεγόμενόν γε ἐπι- 
φωνηματικῶς. 

110. Ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ἡ γνώμη ἐπιφωνουμένῳ τινὶ 
y+ DN / Ε] 3 5 3 ν 3 ΄ ᾽ὔ > 
ἔοικεν ἐπὶ προειρημένοις, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ αὕτη ἐπιφώνημά ἐστι: 

Ν Ν ᾽, ’ὔ / 4 / 
καὶ yap προλέγεται πολλάκις, λαμβάνει μέντοι χώραν 
ποτὲ ἐπιφωνήματος. 

111. Τὸ δέ, 

νήπιος οὐδ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔμελλε κακὰς ὑπὸ κῆρας ἀλύξειν, 
29> ON 3 ΄ x» »ν 3 Ν 3 ΄ 2QXr 
οὐδ᾽ αὐτὸ ἐπιφώνημα ἂν εἴη: ov yap ἐπιλέγεται οὐδὲ 
5 A 509 ν 5 ΄ y 5 Ν 
ἐπικοσμεῖ, οὐδ᾽ ὅλως ἐπιφωνήματι ἔοικεν, ἀλλὰ προσ- 
φωνήματι ἢ ἐπικερτομήματι. 

112. Τὸ δὲ ποιητικὸν ἐν λόγοις ὅτι μὲν μεγαλοπρεπές, 

καὶ τυφλῷ δῆλόν φ λὴν οἱ μὲ  πά δ 
ω δῆλόν φασι, πλὴν οἱ μὲν γυμνῇ πάνυ χρῶνται 
τῇ μιμήσει τῶν ποιητῶν, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐ μιμήσει, ἀλλὰ 
2? / ε / 
μεταθέσει, καθάπερ Ἡρόδοτος. 
΄ , ὧν ,ὕ \ A 

113. Θουκυδίδης μέντοι κἂν λάβῃ παρὰ ποιητοῦ τι, 
ἰδί Dts ΄ lo Ν λ θὲ γὼ ® ε \ 
ἰδίως αὐτῷ χρώμενος ἴδιον τὸ ληφθὲν ποιεῖ, οἷον ὁ μὲν 

Ν > N la , »», 
ποιητὴς ἐπὶ τῆς Κρήτης edn, 


Κ , ἊΣ ” / aN ” ΄ 
PTH τις Yall ἐστι μέσῳ EVL OLVOTTL ποντῷῳ, 


καλὴ καὶ πίειρα, περίρρυτος. 
ε \ Ss 2 \ A ΄ > ΄ an ἢ , ’ 
Oo μὲν On ἐπὶ τοῦ μεγέθους ἐχρήσατο Te “περίρρυτος, 
an » 
ὁ δὲ Θουκυδίδης ὁμονοεῖν τοὺς Σικελιώτας καλὸν οἴεται 


> an 4 a Ν ,ὔ Ν 3 Ν , 
E€lwal, YS οντας | Plas και περιρρυτου, και TAVUTQA παντα 
> la) ἋΣ Ν " ε , 9 
εἰπών, ΥγΥῊΡ TE ἀντὶ νήσου και TEPLPPUTOV WOQAUTWS, OWS 
ν UA “A / 3 ε Ν , > Ν Ν 
ἕτερα λέγειν δοκεῖ, διότι οὐχ ὡς πρὸς μέγεθος, ἀλλὰ πρὸς 
1 γε ἴσοις (punctis superpositis) Ρ. 2 ot P, ον hic supra versum addito. 
3 ἐστιν supra versum add. P. 4 περὶ ἐνθυμήματος in margine P. 22 αὐτῷ: 
αὐτο P accentu supra o eraso. | λειφθὲν P. 23 κρίτης in κρήτης corr. P. | 


γαῖ᾽ ἔστι] codd. Homeri, γ᾽ ἐστὶ P. 24 οἴνοπι: ι« posterius in rasura P. 
25 πήειρα P. 26 ἐχρήσατο τὸ P. 28 ταῦτα P. 


234° 


DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 123 


bears a likeness to the things on which the wealthy pride 
themselves,—cornices, triglyphs, and bands of purple. Indeed, 
it is in itself a mark of verbal opulence. 

109. The enthymeme may be thought to be a kind of 
epiphoneme. But it is not so, since it is employed for pur- 
poses not of adornment but of proof. Though, to be sure, it 
may come last after the manner of an epiphoneme. 

110. Similarly a maxim resembles in some points an 
epiphoneme added to a previous statement. Nevertheless a 
maxim is not an epiphoneme. Though at times it may come 
last like an epiphoneme, it often comes first. 

111. Again, the line 


Fool !—for it was not his weird from the blackness of doom to 


flee’ 


will be no epiphoneme. For it is not additional nor is it 
ornamental. It has no likeness at all to an epiphoneme, but 
rather to an allocution or a taunt. 

112. A touch of poetic diction adds to the elevation of 
prose. Even a blind man can see that, as the proverb has it. 
Still some writers imitate the poets quite crudely. Or rather, 
they do not imitate them, but transfer them to their pages as 
Herodotus has done. 

118. Thucydides acts otherwise. Even if he does borrow 
something from a poet, he uses it in his own way and so makes 
it his own property. Homer, for instance, says of Crete: 


A land there is, even Crete, in the midst of the dark sea-swell, 
Fair, fertile, wave-encompassed’. 


Now Homer has used the word ‘wave-encompassed’ to indi- 
cate the great size of the island. Thucydides, on his part, 
holds the view that the Greek settlers in Sicily should be 
at one, as they belong to the same land and that a wave- 
encompassed one’®. Although he employs throughout the same 
terms as Homer—‘land’ and ‘wave-encompassed’ in place 
of ‘island’—he seems nevertheless to be saying something 


1 Hom. 77. xii. 113. 2 Hom. Odyss. xix. 172. 
3 Thucyd. iv. 64. 


Ιο 


20 


25 


mn 


124 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


ε / la 
ὁμόνοιαν αὐτοῖς ἐχρήσατο. περὶ μὲν δὴ μεγαλοπρεπείας 
τοσαῦτα. 
ν nw 

114. Ὥσπερ δὲ παράκειται φαῦλά twa ἀστείοις 

/ ὍΣ θά \ Ν θ ΄, ε δ᾽ > ΄ a > A 
τισίν, οἷον θάρρει μὲν τὸ θράσος, ἡ δ᾽ αἰσχύνη TH αἰδοῖ, 
Ν 5 Ν / Ν A ἴων 
τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον καὶ τῆς ἑρμηνείας τοῖς χαρακτῆρσιν 

/ an ἴω 
παράκεινται διημαρτημένοι τινές. πρῶτα δὲ περὶ τοῦ 
γειτνιῶντος τῷ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ λέξομεν. ὄνομα μὲν οὖν 
AUTO ψυ ΄ ες (ζ δὲ Ν Ν Θ ΄, ν 

ὦ ψυχρόν, ὁρίζεται δὲ τὸ ψυχρὸν Θεόφραστος οὕτως, 

/ > \ ε / Ν 5 4 5 / 
ψυχρόν ἐστι τὸ ὑπερβάλλον τὴν οἰκείαν ἀπαγγελίαν, 
οἷον 
ἀπυνδάκωτος οὐ τραπεζοῦται κύλιξ, 

3 Ν A > 4 3 Ν 4 4 “J / Ν 
ἀντὶ τοῦ ἀπύθμενος ἐπὶ τραπέζης κύλιξ οὐ τίθεται. τὸ 
\ an ay a 
yap πρᾶγμα σμικρὸν ὃν ov δέχεται ὄγκον τοσοῦτον 

λέξεως. 

115. Τίνεται μέντοι καὶ τὸ ψυχρὸν ἐν τρισίν, ὥσπερ 

\ N , Ἃ N > , ΄ > \N 
Kal τὸ μεγαλοπρεπές. ἢ yap ἐν διανοίᾳ, καθάπερ ἐπὶ 
τοῦ Κύκλωπος λιθοβολοῦντος τὴν ναῦν τοῦ Οδυσσέως 
»» ‘6 ΄ lal , > 5D 2 5 3 AD 
ἔφη τις, “φερομένου τοῦ λίθου αἶγες ἐνέμοντο ἐν αὐτῷ. 
> Ν A ε ζ lal / Ν 5 {2 ε 
ἐκ γὰρ τοῦ ὑπερβεβλημένου τῆς διανοίας καὶ ἀδυνάτου ἢ 

/ 

ψυχρότης. 

116. Ἔν δὲ λέξει ὁ ᾿Αριστοτέλης φησὶ γίνεσθαι 

A se 4 - > , ες δ ε a ? » 2 

τετραχῶς, ὡς ᾿Αλκιδάμας “ὑγρὸν ἱδρῶτα. ἢ ἐν 
συνθέτῳ, ὅταν διθυραμβώδης συντεθῇ ἡ δίπλωσις τοῦ 
9: : 1. ε Nace ΄ὔ 2» Ν + Δ᾽, 
ὀνόματος, ὡς τὸ “ ἐρημόπλανος᾽ ἔφη τις, καὶ εἰ τι ἀλλο 
οὕτως ὑπέρογκον. γίνεται δὲ καὶ ἐν μεταφορᾷ τὸ ψυχρόν, 
“τρέμοντα καὶ ὠχρὰ τὰ πράγματα. τετραχῶς μὲν οὖν 
κατὰ τὴν λέξιν οὕτως ἂν γίγνοιτο. 

117. Σύνθεσις δὲ ψυχρὰ ἡ μὴ εὔρυθμος, ἀλλὰ ἀρυθμος 


i Ν ν ε 4 
οὖσα Kai dua πάντων μακρὰν ἔχουσα, ὥσπερ ἡ τοιάδε, 


3 περὶ ψυχροῦ τοῦ ἀντικειμένου τῷ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ titulus in P. 8 ὅρος ψυχροῦ 


in margine P. 15 on ὅτι ἐν τρισὶν ἡ ψυχρότης in margine P. 22 hiatum 
indicavit Victorius. 24 elom. P: add. edd. 26 πράγματα) Victorius 
ex codd. Aristotelis: γράμματα P. 28 εὔρυθμος] Finckhius, ἐρρυθμος P. 


29 μακρὰν] Schneiderus, μακρὸν P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 125 


different. The reason is that he uses the words with reference 
not to size but to concord.—Thus much with regard to eleva- 
tion of style. 

114. As in the sphere of morals certain bad qualities 
exist side by side with certain attractive qualities (audacity, 
for example, corresponding to bravery, and shame to rever- 
ence), so also the leading types of style are matched by 
distorted varieties. We will first speak of the style which is 
next neighbour to the elevated. Its name is ‘frigid, and it 
is defined by Theophrastus’ as that which transcends the ex- 
pression appropriate to the thought, e.g. 


Chalice unbased is not intabulated®. 


Here the meaning is: ‘a cup without a bottom is not placed 
upon a table. The subject, being trivial, does not admit of 
such magniloquence. 

115. Frigidity, like elevation, arises at three points. One 
of these is the thought itself, as when a writer once said, in 
describing how the Cyclops cast a boulder after the ship of 
Odysseus: ‘ when the boulder was in mid career goats were 
browsing on it’. The words are frigid because the conceit is 
extravagant and impossible. 

116. In diction Aristotle says that frigidity is of fourfold 
origin, arising from [(1) ‘strange terms’; (2) ‘epithets’]...as 
when Alcidamas speaks of ‘moist sweat*’; (3) ‘composites,’ 
when words are compounded in a dithyrambic manner, as 
with the expression ‘desert-wandering’ which someone uses, 
and with other pompous expressions of the kind; (4) ‘ meta- 
phors,’ e.g. ‘a crisis pale and trembling’.’ Frigidity of diction 
may, therefore, arise in four ways. 

117. Composition is frigid when it lacks good rhythm, 
or lacks all rhythm, having long syllables from beginning to 


1 Theophr. 7. λέξ. 2 Soph. Zriptol. fragm., Nauck? p. 265. 
Se Screw Τῆς; 4 Alcid. > Ser. Inc. 


126 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


y ε an > \ A lal 
“ἥκων ἡμῶν εἰς THY χώραν, πάσης ἡμῶν ὀρθῆς οὔσης. 
> \ Ν » Ν 5 Ν 5 Ν Ν Ν 4 
οὐδὲν yap ἔχει λογικὸν οὐδὲ ἀσφαλὲς διὰ THY συνέχειαν 
τῶν μακρῶν συλλαβῶν. 
118. Ψυχρὸν δὲ καὶ τὸ μέτρα τιθέναι συνεχῆ, καθάπερ 
δ τινές, καὶ μὴ κλεπτόμενα ὑπὸ τῆς συνεχείας: ποιήμα γὰρ 
ἄκαιρον ψυχρόν, ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ ὑπέρμετρον. 
1190. Καὶ καθόλου ὁποῖόν τί ἐστιν ἡ ἀλαζονεία, 
la ν \ ΄ 
τοιοῦτον καὶ ἡ ψυχρότης: OTE γὰρ ἀλαζὼν τὰ μὴ προσόντα 
αὐτῷ αὐχεῖ ὅμως ὡς προσόντα, ὅ τε μικροῖς πράγμασιν 
, » \ STEN 3 A 3 , 
10 περιβάλλων ογκον, Kal αὐτὸς ἐν μικροῖς ἀλαζονευομένῳ 
ἔοικεν. καὶ ὁποῖόν τι τὸ ἐν τῇ παροιμίᾳ κοσμούμενον 
ὕπερον, τοιοῦτόν τί ἐστι καὶ τὸ ἐν τῇ ἑρμηνείᾳ ἐξηρμένον 
ἐν μικροῖς πράγμασιν. 
120. Καίτοι τινές φασι δεῖν τὰ μικρὰ μεγάλως λέγειν, 
15 καὶ σημεῖον τοῦτο youre ὑπερβαλλούσης δυνάμεως. 
ἐγὼ δὲ Πολυκράτει μὲν τῷ ῥήτορι Toy) Caine -ὐδοριολζοντο 
* * ὡς ᾿Αγαμέμνονα ἐν ἀντιθέτοις καὶ ταϑκφρο ρθε καὶ 
πᾶσι τοῖς ἐγκωμιαστικοῖς τρόποις" ἔπαιζεν γάρ, οὐκ ἐσπού- 
an an ΕΣ 
δαζεν, καὶ αὐτὸς τῆς γραφῆς ὁ ὄγκος παίγνιόν ἐστι. 
΄, Χ NI 357 oe, Ν \ / 3 \ 
20 παίζειν μὲν δὴ ἐξέστω, ws φημι, TO δὲ πρέπον ἐν παντὶ 
πράγματι φυλακτέον, τοῦτ᾽ ἔστι προσ φόρως ἑρμηνευτέον, 
τὰ μὲν μικρὰ μικρῶς, τὰ μεγάλα δὲ μεγάλως. 
121. Καθάπερ Ξενοφῶν ἐπὶ τοῦ Τηλεβόα ποταμοῦ 
μικροῦ ὄντος καὶ καλοῦ φησιν, “οὗτος δὲ ποταμὸς ἢν 
΄ \ RA x ὃ “Ὁ ἵν Ν ΄ a ΄ 
25 μέγας μὲν OV, καλὸς 0€° τῇ γὰρ βραχύτητι τῆς συνθέσεως 
\ eee) ΄ A Ὁ ΝΣ QM? , 3 ae, eon 
καὶ TH ἀπολήζξει TH εἰς TO ‘ δὲ᾽ μόνον οὐκ ἐπέδειξεν ἡμῖν 
μικρὸν ποταμόν. ἕτερος δέ τις ἑρμηνεύων ὅμοιον τῷ 
T λ β / a Ep ε 2 Ν las A lal 5 / 
ἡλεβόᾳ ποταμῷ ἔφη, ws “ἀπὸ τῶν Λαυρικῶν ὀρέων 
ὁρμώμενος ἐκδιδοῖ ἐς θάλασσαν, καθάπερ τὸν Νεῖλον 
ε ᾽ὔ My Ey Ν » 5 ’ 
30 ἑρμηνεύων κατακρημνιζόμενον ἢ τὸν ἴστρον ἐκβάλλοντα. 
πάντα οὖν τὰ τοιαῦτα ψυχρότης καλεῖται. 


7 on in margine P. 14 o7 ὅπως ἐναντίως φησὶ τῶν ἄλλων in margine P. 
17 lacunam statuit Victorius. 18 ἐσπούδαζεν : € prius in rasura P. 20 δεῖ P. 
25 péyaxxs P. 26 ἀπέδειξεν, ε supra a scripto P. 29 ἐκδιδοῖ: Supra ¢ prius 
aliquid erasum est in P. 30 ἐκβάλλοντα] Gennadius, ἐμβάλλοντα (A alt. supra 
versum scripto) P. 


235" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE τ) 


end, e.g. ‘This land, our land, which I now reach, which I 
find all upstirred’’ On account of the succession of long 
syllables, this sentence is highly questionable and entirely 
lacking in prose rhythm. 

118. Itis also a mark of frigidity to introduce, as some do, 
one metrical phrase after another in prose, the close succession 
of which thrusts them on the attention. A bit of verse out of 
place is just as inartistic as the disregard of metrical rules in 
poetry. 

119. There is a sort of general analogy between impos- 
ture and frigidity. The impostor boasts, facts notwithstanding, 
that qualities belong to him which do not. In like manner, 
also, the writer who invests trifles with pomp resembles one 
who gives himself airs about trifles. A heightened style used 
in connexion with a trivial subject recalls the ‘ornamented 
pestle’ of the proverb. 

120. There are, however, people who hold that we ought 
to use grand language of little things. They regard this as a 
proof of surpassing power. For my own part, I can forgive 
the rhetorician Polycrates who eulogised...... like (another) 
Agamemnon with antitheses, metaphors, and every trick of 
eulogy. He was jesting and not in earnest; the very inflation 
of his writing is but pleasantry. I have no objection to jesting, 
as I say. But fitness must be observed, whatever the subject ; 
or in other words the style must be appropriate,—subdued for 
humble topics, lofty for high themes. 

121. Xenophon obeys this rule when he says of the small 
and beautiful river Teleboas: ‘this was nota large river; beautiful 
it was, though?’ Through the conciseness of the construction, 
and through placing the ‘though’ at the end of the sentence, 
he has almost brought before our very eyes a small river. 
Another writer, on the contrary, when describing a river like 
the Teleboas, said that ‘it rushed from the hills of Laurium 
and disembogued into the sea,’ as though he were describing 
the cataracts of the Nile or the mouth of the Danube®. All 
expressions of this kind are called ‘ frigid,’ 


2=Screine: 2 Xen. Anab. iv. 4, 3: cf. 8 6 supra. 
5. ΘρΥ, πο. 


Io 


15 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


128 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


4 4 Ν Ν / ν / 
122. Γίνεται μεντοι τὰ μικρα μεγάλα ETEPOV τρόπον, 
5 Ν ib) a 3 oe 2 (Jory ©) ΄ “Ὁ 4 
ov διὰ τοῦ ἀπρεποῦς, aN’ ἐνίοτε ὑπ᾽ ἀνάγκης. οἷον ὅταν 
ἂν 7 , Ν 5 ’ὔ ’ 
μικρὰ κατορθώσαντά τινα στρατηγὸν ἐξαίρειν βουλώμεθα 
ε / / x @ Ψ » 5 
ὡς μεγάλα κατωρθωκότα, «ἢ:- οἷον ὅτι ἔφορος ἐν Λακε- 
δαίμονι τὸν περιέργως καὶ οὐκ ἐπιχωρίως σφαιρίσαντα 
ἐμαστίγωσεν: τούτῳ γὰρ αὐτόθεν μικρῷ ἀκουσθῆναὶ ὄντι 
la ε Ν Ν “ 
ἐπιτραγῳδοῦμεν, ὡς οἱ τὰ μικρὰ πονηρὰ ἔθη ἐῶντες ὁδὸν 
τοῖς μείζοσι πονηροῖς ἀνοιγνύουσιν, καὶ ὅτι ἐπὶ τοῖς 
μικροῖς παρανομήμασιν χρὴ κολάζειν μᾶλλον, οὐκ ἐπὶ 
τοῖς μεγάλοις. καὶ τὴν παροιμίαν ἐποίσομεν, " ἀρχὴ δέ 
ν / y ε > la} 4 la} A lol “ἡ 
τοι ἥμισυ παντός, ὡς ἐοικυῖαν τούτῳ τῷ σμικρῷ κακῷ, 7 
ν / 
καὶ OTL οὐδὲν κακὸν μικρόν ἐστιν. 
9 Q 
123. Οὕτως μὲν δὴ ἐξέστω καὶ τὸ μικρὸν κατόρθωμα 
> ΄ὔ 4 > Ν ν 5 4 wn 5 5 
ἐξαίρειν μέγα, οὐ μὴν ὥστε ἀπρεπές τι ποιεῖν, ἀλλ 
ν 
ὥσπερ καὶ τὸ μέγα κατασμικρύνεται χρησίμως πολλάκις, 
οὕτως ἂν καὶ τὸ μικρὸν ἐξαίροιτο. 
124. Μάλιστα δὲ ἡ ὑπερβολὴ ψυχρότατον πάντων. 
Χ ὔ > Ὁ Ν by GC / 5 / ε ἊΝ 
τριττὴ δέ ἐστιν: ἢ γὰρ Kal’ ὁμοιότητα ἐκφέρεται, ὡς τὸ 
« , 3 3 / ε Lal b] Xv > ε 4 ε Ν 
θέειν δ᾽ ἀνέμοισιν ὁμοῖοι, ἢ Kal’ ὑπεροχήν, ὡς τὸ 
δ ΄, , >on \ \ aS ΄ ε Whore) a 
λευκότεροι χιόνος, ἢ κατὰ TO ἀδύνατον, ὡς TO “οὐρανῷ 
ἐστήριξε κάρη. 
125. Πᾶσα μὲν οὖν ὑπερβολὴ ἀδύνατός ἐστιν" οὔτε 
Ν x» / / 4 y 5) ΕΝ 3 72 4 
yap ἂν χιόνος λευκότερον γένοιτο, οὔτ᾽ ἂν ἀνέμῳ θέειν 
Ψ Ψ ΄ ee 2 3 ΄ 9 ΄ 
ὅμοιον. αὕτη μέντοι ἡ ὑπερβολή, ἡ εἰρημένη, ἐξαιρέτως 
5 , 5 4 Ν Ν Ν ΄, ἊΣ »“» 
ὀνομάζεται ἀδύνατος. διὸ δὴ καὶ μάλιστα ψυχρὰ δοκεῖ 
(os ε 7) / 3 / 3, 
πᾶσα ὑπερβολή, διότι ἀδυνάτῳ ἔοικεν. 
126. Διὰ τοῦτο δὲ μάλιστα καὶ οἱ κωμῳδοποιοὶ 
“ 5 “ [2 > “ LO /, 5 4 Ν “A 
χρῶνται AUTH, OTL ἐκ TOV ἀδυνάτου ἐφέλκονται TO γελοῖον, 
ν SN lal la a 5 ¢ ε / / 
ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τῶν Περσῶν τῆς ἀπληστίας ὑπερβαλλόμενός 
2 βουλόμεθα P. 4 jinserui. 6 τοῦτο P. | ὡραῖον in margine P. 8 ἀνυγνύ- 
ουσιν P. ο παρανομίμασιν P. το παροιμία in margine P. | ἐποίσομεν] Hemster- 
husius, ἐποιήσαμεν P. 11 τοῦτο P, τούτῳ τῷ m. rec. P. 12 καὶ P, ἢ supra 
versum add. m. rec. P. 13 δεῖ P. 17 on ὅτι γ᾽ ἡ ὑπερβολὴ ψυχρότατον in 


margine P. Ig ἀνέμοισιν ex ἀνέμοιστιν Ῥ. 20 on τί φησιν περὶ τοῦ 
λευκότεροι χιόνος in margine P. 24 μέντοι ἤτοι ἡ ὑπερβολὴ ἡ εἰρημένη P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 129 


122. Small things, however, may be magnified in another 
way, and that not an unbecoming but sometimes a necessary 
way, for instance when we wish to exalt a general who has 
succeeded in some small enterprises as though he had actually 
won great triumphs. Or we may have to justify the ephor at 
Lacedaemon for scourging a man who played ball with a 
studied disregard of the custom of the country. The offence 
at first strikes the ear as a trivial one. Consequently we 
solemnly descant upon its gravity, pointing out that men who 
permit small malpractices open the way to more serious 
ones, and that we ought to punish for small transgressions 
rather than for great. We shall, further, adduce the proverb 
‘the thin end of the wedge',” showing how it bears upon 
this trifling offence; or we shall go so far as to maintain that 
no offence is trifling. 

123. In this way, then, we may magnify a small success, 
though not at the cost of propriety. As what is great can 
often be depreciated with advantage, so can what is lowly be 
exalted. 

124. The most frigid of all figures is hyperbole, which is 
of three kinds, being expressed either in the form of likeness, 
as ‘a match for the winds in speed’; or of superiority, as 
‘whiter than snow?’; or of impossibility, as ‘with her head 
she has smitten the sky*.’ 

125. Indeed, every hyperbole transcends the possible. 
There could be nothing ‘whiter than snow,’ nor anything 
‘a match for the winds in speed.’ However, the particular 
hyperbole already mentioned is specially called ‘impossible.’ 
And so the very reason why every hyperbole seems, above all 
things, frigid, is that it suggests something impossible. 

126. This is the chief reason also why the comic poets 
employ this figure. From the impossible they evolve the 
laughable, as when someone said hyperbolically of the vora- 

1 Cp. Hesiod, Works and Days, 40, νήπιοι, οὐδὲ ἴσασιν ὅσῳ πλέον ἥμισυ παντός. 
2? Hom. //. x. 436, 

τοῦ δὴ καλλίστους ἵππους ἴδον ἠδὲ μεγίστους" 

λευκότεροι χιόνος, θείειν δ᾽ ἀνέμοισιν ὁμοῖοι, κτλ. 


3 Hom. 77: iv. 443, 
οὐρανῷ ἐστήριξε κάρη, Kal ἐπὶ χθονὶ βαίνει. 


R. 9 


130 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA> 


τις ἔφη, ὅτι ‘media ἐξέχεζον ὅλα, καὶ ὅτι ‘Bods ἐν ταῖς 
γνάθοις ἔφερον. 
127. Τοῦ δὲ αὐτοῦ εἴδους ἐστὶ καὶ τὸ ‘ φαλακρότερος 


χρυσῶ 


? an 
5 χρυσοτέρα᾽ τὸ Σαπφικὸν ἐν ὑπερβολῇ λέγεται καὶ αὐτὸ 


ς 


DOL ’ Ν Ν © ΄’΄ ε /, ᾽ Ν Ν 
ευοιας, και TO κολοκύντης VYLEOTEPOS. TO δὲ 


\ 5 , NA 2. 0A a 5 , , Ε 
καὶ ἀδυνάτως, πλὴν αὐτῷ γε τῷ ἀδυνάτῳ χάριν ἔχει, 
> 4 a Ν Ν 4 ͵ὕὔ » 
οὐ ψυχρότητα. ὃ δὴ καὶ μάλιστα θαυμάσειεν αν τις 
“ an , 2 ΄ὕ΄ ΄ὕ 4 \ 
Σαπφοῦς τῆς θείας, ὅτι φύσει κινδυνώδει πράγματι καὶ 
δυσκατορθώτῳ ἐχρήσατο ἐπιχαρίτως. καὶ περὶ μὲν ψυχρό- 
Ν ἴων Lot nw lat wn 
10 TNTOS καὶ ὑπερβολῆς τοσαῦτα. νῦν δὲ περὶ τοῦ γλαφυροῦ 
χαρακτῆρος λέξομεν. 


111. 


ε Ν ε 
128. ῳὋὉ γλαφυρὸς λόγος χαριεντισμὸς καὶ ἱλαρὸς 235" 
λόγος ἐστί. τῶν δὲ χαρίτων at μέν εἰσι μείζονες καὶ 
σεμνότεραι, αἱ τῶν ποιητῶν, ai δὲ εὐτελεῖς μᾶλλον καὶ 
lal a Ce) 
15 κωμικώτεραι, σκώμμασιν ἐοικυῖαι, οἷον αἱ ᾿Αριστοτέλους 
, Loy \ , N Ν <® εκ " 
χάριτες καὶ Σώφρονος καὶ Λυσίου: τὸ γὰρ “ἧς ῥᾷον ἂν 
3 ΄ \ aN , Ἃ \ ὃ AN ) NEN 
Tis ἀριθμήσειεν τοὺς ὀδόντας ἢ τοὺς δακτύλους, TO ἐπὶ 
“ Ν ν + > wn 4 
τῆς πρεσβύτιδος, καὶ TO “ὅσας ἄξιος ἦν λαβεῖν πληγάς, 
/ mA ᾽ὔ ) ε lat 5 ee Ν ὑδὲ 
τοσαύτας εἴληφεν δραχμάς, οἱ τοιοῦτοι ἀστεϊσμοὶ οὐδὲν 
/ he 7 
20 διαφέρουσιν σκωμμάτων, οὐδὲ πόρρω γελωτοποιΐας εἰσί. 
120. Τὸ δὲ 
τῇ δέ θ᾽ ἅμα Νύμφαι 
παίζουσι" γέγηθε δέ τε φρένα Λητώ: 
καὶ 
25 ῥεῖα δ᾽ ἀριγνώτη πέλεται: καλαὶ δέ τε πᾶσαι" 

3 παροιμία in margine Ρ. 5 αὐτὸ ex αὐτῶ P. 8 πράγματι in margine 
addaak: 9 ἐπὶ xapirws, accentu supra a eraso P. 12 περὶ γλαφυροῦ 
titulus in P, rei partitione in margine quoque indicata.  χαρίεντισμος ἐστι λόγος 
ἵλαρός P. ὁ γλαφυρὸς λόγος χαριεντισμὸς καὶ ἱλαρὸς λόγος in margine P. 


τό χάτιτες Ρ. [9 δραγμας Ρ. 20 ὡραῖον in margine P. 23 γέγηθέ 
τε sine δὲ Ρ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 131 


city of the Persians that ‘they voided entire plains, and that 
‘they carried bullocks in their jaws.’ 

12'7. Of the same character are the expressions ‘ balder 
than the cloudless blue’ and ‘lustier than a pumpkin’’ 
Sappho’s words ‘more golden than all gold*’ are themselves 
hyperbolical and impossible, though from their very impossi- 
bility they derive charm, not frigidity. Indeed, one cannot 
sufficiently admire this in the divine Sappho, that by sheer 
genius she so handles a risky and seemingly unmanageable 
business as to invest it with charm. These observations on the 
subject of frigidity and hyperbole must suffice. We shall next 
consider the elegant style. 


ClsVAe TIBI 111’ 


128. Elegance of expression includes grace and geniality. 
Some pleasantries—those of the poets—are loftier and more 
dignified, while others are more commonplace and jocular, 
resembling banter, as is the case with those of Aristotle 
and Sophron and Lysias. Such witticisms as ‘whose teeth 
could sooner be counted than her fingers’ (of an old woman) 
and ‘as many blows as he deserved to win, so many drachmas 
has he won?, differ in no way from gibes, nor are they far 
removed from buffoonery. 

129. Again, take the lines: 


While the daughters of him whose shield is the Aegis sport at 
her side, 

The beautiful nymphs of the field, and Letd beholds her with 
pride, 

And by face and by radiant head above the rest is she tall, 

And, where lovely is every one, they are all by her outshone: 

So did the maid unwed outshine her handmaids all’®. 


1 Scr. Inc. 2 Sophron, Fragmm. 108, 34, Kaibel C. G. Ζ. 
3 Sappho, Fragm. 123, Bergk?. 
4 Lysias, Fragmm. 5, 275, Baiter-Sauppe. 
> Hom. Odyss. vi. 105, 
τῇ δέ θ᾽ ἅμα νύμφαι, κοῦραι Διὸς αἰγιόχοιο, 
ἀγρονόμοι παίζουσι᾽ γέγηθε δέ τε φρένα Λητώ" 
πασάων δ᾽ ὑπὲρ ἥ γε κάρη ἔχει ἠδὲ μέτωπα, 
ῥεῖά τ᾽’ ἀριγνώτη πέλεται, καλαὶ δέ τε πᾶσαι" 
ὡς ἥ γ᾽ ἀμφιπόλοισι μετέπρεπε παρθένος ἀδμής. 


on 


Io 


= 
σι 


20 


132 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


Ν iQ) / > ε / ΧΝ /, δ 
[καὶ] αὗταί εἰσιν αἱ λεγόμεναι σεμναὶ χάριτες καὶ 
μεγάλαι. 

A 2 

130. Χρηται δὲ αὐταῖς Ὅμηρος καὶ πρὸς δείνωσιν 
5 4 ἈΝ yy Ν 4 4 / > lal /, 
ἐνίοτε Kal ἔμφασιν, καὶ παίζων φοβερώτερός ἐστι, πρῶτός 

nan Ν , ν las 
Te εὑρηκέναι δοκεῖ φοβερὰς χάριτας, ὥσπερ TO ἐπὶ τοῦ 
3 , ΄ ΝΟ 5. ΙΝ na , N 5 
ἀχαριτωτάτου προσώπου, TO ἐπὶ TOV Κύκλωπος, τὸ [οὖν] 

> » x 
‘Otrw ἐγὼ πύματον ἔδομαι, τοὺς δὲ λοιποὺς πρώτους, 

Ν lay te / 5 Ν ν > ἊΝ > 4 
τὸ τοῦ Κύκλωπος E€vioy: οὐ yap οὕτως αὐτὸν ἐνέφηνεν 

Ν 3 A y 9 ΄ ne , SIND 5. κα 
δεινὸν ἐκ τῶν ἄλλων, ὅταν δύο δειπνῇ ἑταίρους, οὐδ᾽ ἀπὸ 

lol n 3 an ΄ n we na 
Tov θυρεοῦ ἢ EK TOV ῥοπάλου, ὡς EK τούτου TOV ἀστεϊσμοῦ. 

131. Χρῆται δὲ τῷ τοιούτῳ εἴδει καὶ Ξενοφῶν, καὶ 

, , a κα 
αὐτὸς δεινότητας εἰσάγει ἐκ χαρίτων, οἷον ἐπὶ τῆς ἐνόπλου 
5 / G2 Ν (: Ν “ ,ὔ 3 Ν 
ὀρχηστρίδος, “ἐρωτηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ Παφλαγόνος, εἰ καὶ 
αἱ γυναῖκες αὐτοῖς συνεπολέμουν, ἔφη: αὗται γὰρ καὶ 
y Ν λέ ? ὃ Ν Ν 5 ΄ ε ὃ ΄ὔ 
ἔτρεψαν τὸν βασιλέα. υττὴ γὰρ ἐμφαίνεται ἡ δεινότης 
an Ν ν ΕῚ lal lot Y 
ἐκ τῆς χάριτος, ἡ μὲν OTL οὐ γυναῖκες αὐτοῖς ElTOVTO, 
Q 5 ω > 

ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Αμαζόνες, ἡ δὲ κατὰ βασιλέως, εἰ οὕτως ἣν ἀσθενής, 
ὡς ὑπὸ γυναικῶν φυγεῖν. 

Ν \ > » A / , \ 

132. Ta μὲν οὐν εἴδη των χαριτων τοσάδε καὶ 

Ν ε A lal , “" 
τοιάδε. εἰσὶν δὲ αἱ μὲν ἐν τοῖς πράγμασι χάριτες, οἷον 
lat ἴω 3, yo ἴω 
νυμφαῖοι κῆποι, ὑμέναιοι, ἔρωτες, ὅλη ἡ Σαπφοῦς ποίησις. 
a “Ὁ ε 
τὰ γὰρ τοιαῦτα, κἂν ὑπὸ ᾿Ιππώνακτος λέγηται, χαρίεντά 
5 Ν > Ν ε Ν ἊΝ la) > ε nn > Ν Ν. 
ἐστι, καὶ αὐτὸ ἱλαρὸν τὸ πρᾶγμα ἐξ ἑαυτοῦ: οὐδεὶς γὰρ 
“δ ε ,΄ 10 5) , ὑδὲ ἊΝ 4 > \ 
av ὑμέναιον ado. ὀργιζόμενος, οὐδὲ τὸν Epwra ᾿Βρινὺν 
a \ an 
ποιήσειεν TH ἑρμηνείᾳ ἢ γίγαντα, οὐδὲ TO γελᾶν κλαίειν. 
ν ε , 3 UY , 5 / Ν Ν 

133. ὥστε ἡ μέν τις ἐν πράγμασι KAPLS ἐστι, τὰ δὲ 

καὶ ἡ λέξις ποιεῖ ἐπιχαριτώτερα, οἷον 
ὡς δ᾽ ὅτε ΠΠανδαρέου κούρη, χλωρηΐς ἀηδών, 
καλὸν ἀείδῃσιν, ἔαρος νέον ἱσταμένοιο" 

1 καὶ 560]. Schneiderus. 6 χαριτωτάτου P, a et oro supra versum scripto. | 
οὖν P, om. edd. ἡ ποίματον P. 8 ἕἑένειον P. 9. δεινῶν in δεινὸν corr. 
atram. pall. m. rec. P. ἑτέρους αἱ supra versum scripto P. 1g περὶ χάριτος 
λόγου titulus in P. 21 νύμφαιοι P. 22 λέγεται P: corr. edd. 24 ἄδοι] 


Schneiderus, ἄδει P. 25 ποιήσειεν) Hammerus, ποιήσει ἐν Ῥ. 26 πράγμασι] 
Victorius, πράγματι Ῥ. 28 Πανδαρέου] codd. Homeri, Πανδαρέη Ῥ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 133 


The so-called dignified and noble graces are of this 
kind. 

130. Homer sometimes uses such means in order to 
make a scene more intense and telling. Even when he 
is jesting he is somewhat awe-inspiring, and he seems to 
have been the first to devise grim pleasantries, as in the 
passage describing that most repulsive personage the Cyclops: 
‘Noman will I eat last, but the rest before him,—that guest- 
gift of the Cyclops’. No other circumstance reveals so clearly 
the grimness of the monster—not his supper made from two 
of the comrades of Odysseus, nor his crag-door, nor his club— 
as this single jest. 

131. Xenophon also is familiar with this department of 
style, and can (like Homer) turn a pleasantry into a sarcasm, 
as in the passage describing the armed dancing-girl. “A 
Greek was asked by the Paphlagonian, whether their women 
accompanied them to the wars. ‘Yes,’ he replied, ‘for they 
routed the Great King®’” This pleasantry clearly has a 
double point, implying in the first place that it was not mere 
women who accompanied them, but Amazons; and the other 
hit is at the Great King, who is taunted with being such a 
poor creature as to be worsted by women. 

132. Grace of style has, therefore, a certain number of 
forms and characteristics. The grace may reside in the 
subject-matter, if it is the gardens of the Nymphs, marriage- 
lays, love-stories, or the poetry of Sappho generally. Such 
themes, even in the mouth of a Hipponax, possess grace, the 
subject-matter having a winsomeness of its own. No one 
would think of singing a bridal song in an angry mood; no 
contortions of style can change Love into a Fury or a Giant, 
or transmute laughter into tears. 

133. While grace is sometimes inherent in the theme 
itself, at other times diction can lend an added charm, as 
in the lines :— 

As Pandareus’ daughter, the wan-brown nightingale, 
Trilleth her lovely song in the flush of the new-born Spring’. 


1 Hom. Odyss. ix. 369. 2 Xen. “παῤ. vi. 1, 13. 
5. Hom. Odyss. xix. 518. 


134 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


> “ Ν Ν ε 5 Ν / 5 / Ν Ν » 
ἐνταῦθα γὰρ καὶ ἡ ἀηδὼν χάριεν ὀρνίθιον, καὶ τὸ ἔαρ 
φύσει χάριεν, πολὺ δὲ ἐπικεκόσμηται τῇ ἑρμηνείᾳ, καὶ 
ἔστι χαριέστερα τῷ τε “χλωρηὶς καὶ τῷ “Πανδαρέου 
κούρη εἰπεῖν ἐπὶ ὄρνιθος, ἅπερ τοῦ ποιητοῦ [διά ἐστι. 
5 134. Πολλάκις δὲ καὶ τὰ μὲν πράγματα ἀτερπῆ ἐστι 
4 Ν ’ὔ’ ε Ν Ν nw 4 ’ ε , 
φύσει καὶ στυγνά, ὑπὸ δὲ τοῦ λέγοντος γίνεται ἱλαρά. 
a \ Ne a an , con \ 
τοῦτο δὲ παρὰ Ξενοφῶντι δοκεῖ πρώτῳ εὑρῆσθαι: λαβὼν 
Ν 5 4 / Ν / Ν 2) oo ᾽ὔ 
γὰρ ἀγέλαστον πρόσωπον καὶ στυγνόν, τὸν ᾿Αγλαϊτάδαν, 
Ν / 7 a 3 5 lal 7 ν ἘΣ, 
τὸν Πέρσην, γέλωτα εὗρεν ἐξ αὐτοῦ χαρίεντα, ὅτι “ῥᾷόν 
ιο ἐστι πῦρ | ἐκτρῖψαι ἀπὸ σοῦ ἢ γέλωτα." 
135. Αὕτη δέ ἐστι καὶ ἡ δυνατωτάτη χάρις, καὶ 
μάλιστα ἐν τῷ λέγοντι. τὸ μὲν γὰρ πρᾶγμα καὶ φύσει 
Ν > Ν ΄ὕ , 2 \> mM Ὁ 
στυγνὸν HV καὶ πολέμιον χάριτι, ὥσπερ Kal ᾿Αγλαϊτάδας. 
ε 3 ν 5 ᾽ὔ ν Ν 5 Ν wn 4 4 
ὁ δ᾽ ὥσπερ ἐνδείκνυται, OTL Kal ἀπὸ TOV τοιούτων παίζειν 
» ε ὧν Ν ε Ν nw 4 4 
15 ἔστιν, ὡσπερεὶ καὶ ὑπὸ θερμοῦ ψύχεσθαι, θερμαίνεσθαι 
δὲ ὑπὸ τῶν ψυχρῶν. 
136. ᾿Επεὶ δὲ τὰ εἴδη τῶν χαρίτων δέδεικται, τίνα 
5 ἊΝ ΝΑ 5 / nn Ν Ν , 4 > 5 
ἐστὶ καὶ ἐν τίσιν, νῦν καὶ τοὺς τόπους παραδείξομεν, ἀφ 
® ε , > δ GA ε Ν > CS ΄,ὔ ε Nie 
ὧν at χάριτες. ἦσαν δὲ ἡμῖν αἱ μὲν ἐν TH λέξει, at δὲ ἐν 
"οτοῖς πράγμασιν. παραδείξομεν οὖν καὶ τοὺς τόπους καθ᾽ 
ἑκάτερα: πρώτους δὲ τοὺς τῆς λέξεως. 
52 Χ > , > \ , Cr) , 
137. Εὐθὺς οὖν TPWTY ἐστι χάρις ἢ EK συντομιας, 
ὅταν τὸ αὐτὸ μηκυνόμενον ἄχαρι γένηται, ὑπὸ δὲ τάχους 
χάριεν, ὥσπερ παρὰ Ξενοφῶντι, “τῷ ὄντι τούτῳ οὐδὲν 
,ὕ na ε , 3 Ν 3 Ν SN > ε Ν 
25 μέτεστι τῆς Ἑλλάδος, ἐπεὶ ἔγω αὑτὸν εἶδον, ὡσπερεὶ 
Λυδόν, ἀμφότερα τὰ ὦτα τετρυπημένον' καὶ εἶχεν οὕτως. 
τὸ γὰρ ἐπιλεγόμενον τὸ “εἶχεν οὕτως᾽ ὑπὸ τῆς συντομίας 
δ , Ὁ 5 ΩΝ 5 , \ , Ψ «Ὁ 
τὴν χάριν ποιεῖ, εἰ δὲ ἐμηκύνθη διὰ πλειόνων, ὅτι “ἔλεγεν 
qn 3 n an Ν 3 ΄ὕ ) / a Ν 
ταῦτα ἀληθῆ, σαφῶς γὰρ ἐτετρύπητο, διήγημα ἂν ψιλὸν 
30 ἐγένετο ἀντὶ χάριτος. 
I χαρίεν P. 3 τῷ τε.. καὶ τῷ] Finckhius, τό τε... καὶ τὸ P. | Παν- 
δαρέη P: cp. Ρ- 132 v. 28 supra. 9 ῥᾷον] codd. Xen., ῥάδιον P. 
10 ἐκτρίψαι P. | on ῥάδιόν ἐστι πῦρ ἀποτρίψαι ἀπὸ σοῦ ἢ γέλωτα in margine P. 


11 δυνατοτάτη Ρ. 18 παραδείξομεν] Galeus, παραδείξομαι P. 24 τοῦτο Ρ. 
26 τετρυπημένον] codd. Xen., τετριμμένον Ῥ. 


236° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 135 


This passage refers to the nightingale which is a delightful 
songstress, and to the Spring which is a delightful season of 
the year. But the wording has greatly embellished the idea, 
and the picture is the more delightful because the epithets 
‘wan-brown’ and ‘daughter of Pandareus’ are applied to the 
bird. Now these touches are the poet’s own. 

134. It often happens that, unattractive and sombre as 
the subject-matter in itself may be, it sparkles in the writer’s 
hands. This secret seems to have been first discovered by 
Xenophon. Having for his subject so grave and gloomy a 
personage as the Persian Aglaitadas, Xenophon makes at 
his expense the pleasant jest, ‘One could sooner strike fire 
from your skull than laughter’’ 

135. This is the most effective kind of charm, and that 
which most depends upon the writer. The subject-matter 
may in itself be sombre and hostile to charm, as with Aglai- 
tadas. But the writer shows that, even with such material, one 
can jest; there is the possibility, so to speak, of being cooled 
even by what is hot, or warmed with things cold. 

186. Now that the varieties of graceful style, and its 
elements, have been indicated, we will next indicate its 
sources. As we have already said, it consists partly in 
expression and partly in subject. So we will present the 
sources severally, beginning with those of expression. 

137. The very first grace of style is that which results 
from compression, when a thought which would have been 
spoiled by dwelling on it is made graceful by a light and 
rapid touch. Xenophon will furnish an example: “‘ This 
man has really no part or lot in Greece, for he has (as I 
have myself seen) both his ears pierced like a Lydian’; and 
so it was%.” The clinching stroke ‘and so it was’ has all the 
charm of brevity. If the thought had been developed 
at greater length, under some such form as ‘what he said 
was true since the man had evidently had his ears pierced,’ 
we should have had a bald narrative in place of a flash of 
grace. 


1 Xen. Cyrop. xi. 2, 15. 2 Xen. Anad. iil. 1, 31. 
a4 5 ᾽ 


σι 


Io 


20 


136 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


138. Πολλάκις δὲ καὶ δύο φράζεται dv ἑνὸς πρὸς τὸ 
/ a 5 Ν nw 9 ͵ 4 » ν 
χάριεν, οἷον ἐπὶ τῆς ᾿Αμαζόνος καθευδούσης ἔφη τις, ὅτι 
“τὸ τόξον ἐντεταμένον ἔκειτο, καὶ ἢ φαρέτρα πλήρης, τὸ 
4 5 ΝΝ Las Lal Ν Ν Lal 5 “2 ᾽ 5 
γέρρον ἐπὶ τῇ κεφαλῇ: τοὺς δὲ ζωστῆρας οὐ λύονται. ἐν 
γὰρ τούτῳ καὶ ὁ νόμος εἴρηται ὁ περὶ τοῦ ζωστῆρος, καὶ 
ν 5 A Ν ἴω Ν 4 , Ν Las 
ὅτι οὐκ ἔλυσε TOV ζωστῆρα, TA δύο πράγματα διὰ μιᾶς 
ε ’ὔ \ 5 Ν wn 7 4 , ὔὕ 
ἑρμηνείας. καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς συντομίας ταύτης γλαφυρόν τί 
ἐστι. 
139. Δεύτερος δὲ τόπος ἐστὶν ἀπὸ τῆς τάξεως. τὸ 
Ν ῶ.ι ὦ n \ \ ON , ΕΣ , ye \ 
yap αὐτὸ πρῶτον μὲν τεθὲν ἣ μέσον ἄχαρι γίνεται: ἐπὶ δὲ 
τοῦ τέλους χάριεν, οἷον ὡς ὁ Ξενοφῶν φησιν ἐπὶ τοῦ 
Κύρου, “δίδωσι δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ δῶρα, ἵππον καὶ στολὴν καὶ 
» ἈΝ Ν ͵ὕ ,΄ ε ὔὕ ) 5 ἊΝ 
στρεπτόν, καὶ τὴν χώραν μηκέτι ἁρπάζεσθαι. ἐν γὰρ 
τούτοις τὸ μὲν τελευταῖόν ἐστι τὸ τὴν χάριν ποιοῦν τὸ 
Ὡς ΞθΝ ΄ ΄ « ΄ ἢ \ Ν ΄ aA ΄ 
τὴν χώραν μηκέτι ἁρπάζεσθαι᾽ διὰ τὸ ξένον τοῦ δώρου 
Ν Ν 5 / y+ Ν c / ἴω / 5 
καὶ τὴν ἰδιότητα. αἴτιος δὲ ὁ τόπος τῆς χάριτος. εἰ 
nan an 5 ,ὕ 5 A ὯΝ ae 7 ‘ 7, 
γοῦν πρῶτον ἐτάχθη, ἀχαριτώτερον ἦν, οἷον ὅτι “δίδωσιν 
5 lal δῶ vA , ΄ ε LC 0 Ἄν 
αὐτῷ δῶρα, τήν τε χώραν μηκέτι ἁρπάζεσθαι, καὶ ἵππον 
Ν Ν Ν / 3 an Ν Ν Ν 5 4 
Kal στολὴν Kal στρεπτόν. νῦν δὲ προειπὼν TA εἰθισμένα 
nan nan ΕἸ , Ν ΄ Ν y» 3 i) 
δῶρα, τελευταῖον ἐπήνεγκεν TO ξένον καὶ ἄηθες, ἐξ ὧν 
ἁπάντων συνῆκται ἡ χάρις. 
140. Αἱ δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν σχημάτων χάριτες δῆλαί εἰσιν 
καὶ πλεῖσται παρὰ Σαπῴφοῖ, οἷον ἐκ τῆς ἀναδιπλώσεως, 


Ψ / Ν Χ ζ ? ¢ / 
ὅπου νύμφη πρὸς THY παρθενίαν φησί, “παρθενία, Tap- 


/ an an » ᾽ ε δὲ 3 ΄, Ν 
5 θενία, που με λιπουσα OLN) ’ n € ATTOK PLVETQAL T Pos 


SEN aA Pe) ΄ Oe, 9 Ν ΄ 35. ὅτ 
αὐτὴν τῷ AVTM σχήματι, OUKETL new προς σε, OVUKETL 


5 woTjpas: ὦ in rasura Ρ. 19 inter καὶ et στολὴν litura in P. 
24 Omovedd.: ποῦ P. | παρθενείαν P. 24, 25 παρθενία alterum supra 
versum atram. evan. add. P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 137 


138. The conveyance of two ideas in one sentence often 
gives a graceful effect. A writer once said of a sleeping 
Amazon: ‘Her bow lay strung, her quiver full, her buckler 
by her head ; their girdles they never loose!’ At one and the 
same time the custom concerning the girdle is indicated and 
its observance in the present case,—the two facts by means of 
one expression. And from this conciseness a certain elegance 
results. 

1389. Grace of style comes, in the second place, from 
arrangement. The very thought which, if placed at the 
beginning or middle of a sentence, would have no charm, 
is often full of grace when it comes at the end. This is 
the case with a passage of Xenophon relating to Cyrus: ‘as 
presents he gives him a horse, a robe, a linked collar, and the 
assurance that his country should be no longer plundered?’ 
It is the last clause in this sentence (viz. ‘the assurance that 
his country should be no longer plundered’) which constitutes 
its charm, the gift being so strange and unique. And the 
charm is due to the position of the clause. Had it been 
placed first, the anticlimax would have spoiled it: as (for 
example) ‘he gives him as presents the assurance that his 
country should be no longer plundered, and also a horse, 
robe, and linked collar” As it is, he has put first the ac- 
customed presents, and added in conclusion the novel and 
unusual gift. It is the total effect that constitutes the 
charm. 

140. The graces that spring from the employment of 
figures are manifest, and abound most of all in Sappho. An 
instance in point is the figure ‘reduplication, as when the 
bride addressing her Maidenhood says 

Maidenhood, Maidenhood, whither away, 
Forsaking me? 
And her Maidenhood makes reply to her in the same 
figure :— 
Not again unto thee shall I come for aye, 
Not again unto thee !? 


Xen. Azad. i. 2, 27. 3 Sappho, Aragm. 109, Bergk*. 


σι 


Io 


20 


138 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


» Ψ 


ἥξω: πλείων γὰρ χάρις ἐμφαίνεται, ἢ εἴπερ ἅπαξ ἐλέχθη 
ἡ 


\ 5» lal , ΄, > / Ν 
και ανεὺυ του σχήματος. καιτοι ἀναδίπλωσις TT POS 


δεινότητας μᾶλλον δοκεῖ εὑρῆσθαι, ἡ δὲ καὶ τοῖς δεινο- 
τάτοις καταχρῆται ἐπιχαρίτως. 

141. Χαριεντίζεται δέ ποτε καὶ ἐξ ἀναφορᾶς, ws ἐπὶ 
τοῦ Ἑ σπέρου, ‘“Eomepe, πάντα φέρεις, φησί, ‘ φέρεις 
Wee , > , , an ) \ Ἂς 53 “ 
ὄϊν, φέρεις αἶγα, φέρεις ματέρι παῖδα. καὶ γὰρ ἐνταῦθα 
ε ΄ 2 \ 3 A ΄ a 5 , » DN \ 301 ν 
ἢ χάρις ἐστὶν ἐκ τῆς λέξεως τῆς “ φέρεις᾽ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ 
ἀναφερομένης. 

142. | Πολλὰς δ᾽ ay τις καὶ ἄλλας ἐκφέροι χάριτας. 

/ Ν Ν 5 Ν / 4 xX > A 
γίγνονται δὲ καὶ ἀπὸ λέξεως χάριτες ἢ ἐκ μεταφορᾶς, 
ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ τέττιγος, “πτερύγων δ᾽ ὑποκακχέει λιγυρὰν 
5 ’ὔ’ ν 3 x / 4 5 / 
ἀοιδάν, ὅ τι ToT ἂν φλόγιον καθέταν ἐπιπτάμενον 

aA? 
καταυλεῖ: 

143. ἢ ἐκ συνθέτου [τοῦ] ὀνόματος καὶ διθυραμβικοῦ, 
‘ 4 4 , \ ΝᾺ ἊΝ 
δέσποτα Πλούτων μελανοπτερύγων, τουτὶ δεινὸν πρὸ 

72 τῶ / ? a / Ν Ν / , 
πτερύγων αὐτὸ ποίησον. ἃ μάλιστα δὴ κωμῳδικὰ παίγνιά 
ἐστι καὶ σατυρικά. 

144. Καὶ ἐξ ἰδιωτικοῦ δὲ ὀνόματος γίγνεται, ὡς ὁ 
> Ψ 4, 7 / ΄ὔ 3 ΄ 
Ἀριστοτέλης, “ὅσῳ γάρ, φησί, “μονώτης εἰμί, φιλο- 
μυθότερος γέγονα. καὶ ἐκ πεποιημένου, ὡς ὃ αὐτὸς ἐν 

A ΕῚ an ge Ν > / Ν / 5 ’ λ 
τῷ αὐτῴ, “ὅσῳ γὰρ αὐτίτης καὶ μονώτης εἰμί, φιλομυ- 
θότερος γέγονα. τὸ μὲν γὰρ “ μονώτης᾽ ἰδιωτικωτέρου 
» 3" 3 2 Ν \ « τ) ᾽ ΄ 3 A 
ἔθους ἤδη ἐστί, τὸ δὲ “αὐτίτης᾽ πεποιημένον ἐκ τοῦ 
αὐτός. 

145. Πολλὰ δὲ ὀνόματα καὶ παρὰ τὴν θέσιν τὴν ἐπί 

, poo a 5 Ν » aq , 5. ΕΝ 
τινος χαρίεντά ἐστιν, οἷον ‘6 γὰρ ὄρνις οὗτος κόλαξ ἐστὶ 


3 εὑρῆσθαι ex εὑρεῖσθαι P. 4 ἐπιχαρίτως] Finckhius, ἐπὶ χάριτος P. 7. ὄϊν} 


Paulus Manutius. οἶνον P.- 11 ἢ sine accentu P. 12 ὑποκακχέει: ὑπο in 
rasura P. | ληγυρὰν P. 14, 15 katavdet’ ἢ] Finckhius, καταυδείη P. I5 τοῦ 
secl. Finckhius. t6 Πλούτων] Bergkius, πλοῦτον P. 16,17 προπτερύγων 


ἘΣ 18 σατυρικά] Galeus, σατύρια Ῥ, 


236" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 139 


The thought, thus presented, has more grace than if it had 
been expressed once only and without the figure. ‘Redupli- 
cation,’ it is true, seems to have been devised more particularly 
with a view to giving energy to style. But in Sappho’s hands 
even the most passionate energy is transfigured with grace. 
141. Sometimes also Sappho makes graceful use of the 

figure ‘anaphora,’ as in the lines on the Evening Star :— 

O Evening Star, thou bringest all that’s best: 

The sheep, the goat, thou bringest home, to rest: 

The child thou bringest to the mother’s breast’. 


Here the charm lies in the repetition of the verb ‘thou 
bringest, which has the same reference throughout. 

142. Many other examples of graceful language might 
easily be cited. It is attained, for instance, by choice of 
words or by metaphor, as in the passage about the cicala :— 

From ’neath his wings he pours 

A strain of piercing notes: 

Far up that fiery vapour-veil it soars 
Which o’er the landscape floats’. 

143. Another source is dithyrambic compounds such 
as :— 

O Pluto, lord of sable-pinioned things, 

This do thou—’twere more dread than all their wings*! 
Such freaks of language are best suited for comic and satyric 
poetry. 

144, Yet another source is unique expressions, as when 
Aristotle says ‘the more self-centered I am, the more myth- 
enamoured I become?#’ Coined words, again, are another 
source, as in the same author and passage: ‘the more soli- 
tary and self-centered I am, the more myth-enamoured I 
become’*. The word ‘self-centered’ is of a more unique cha- 
racter than the word ‘solitary’ which is formed from ‘sole.’ 

145. Many words owe their charm to their application 
to a special object. For example: ‘why, this bird is a flatterer 


1 Sappho, Aragm. 95, Bergk*. 2 Alcaeus, Aragm, 39, Bergk*. 
3 Lyric. Fragm. Adesp. 126, Bergk‘. 
4 Aristot. Fragm. 618 (ed. Berol.). Cp. ὃ 97 supra. 


[40 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 
Ν an “ lan) 
καὶ κόβαλος. ἐνταῦθα ἡ χάρις ἀπὸ τοῦ σκῶψαι τὸν 
» /, A Ν A Ν δ / 4 
ὄρνιν καθάπερ ἄνθρωπον, καὶ ὅτι τὰ μὴ συνήθη ἔθετο 
ὀνόματα τῷ ὄρνιθι. αἱ μὲν οὖν τοιαῦται χάριτες παρ᾽ 
αὐτὰς τὰς λέξεις. 
5 146. Ἔκ δὲ παραβολῆς καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ ἐξέχοντος ἀνδρὸς 
ἢ Σαπφώ φησι, 
πέρροχος ὡς OT ἀοιδὸς ὁ Λέσβιος ἀλλοδαποῖσιν. 
ἐνταῦθα γὰρ χάριν ἐποίησεν ἡ παραβολὴ μᾶλλον ἢ 
2? , 3 le} 5 la} 2 ν ε 4 
μέγεθος, καίτοι ἐξῆν εἰπεῖν πέρροχος ὥσπερ ἡ σελήνη 
10 TOV ἄλλων ἄστρων, 7) ὃ ἥλιος ὁ λαμπρότερος, 7) ὅσα ahha 
ἐστὶ ποιητικώτερα. 

147. Σώφρων δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐπὶ τοῦ ὁμοίου εἴδους 
φησί, “θᾶσαι, ὅσα φύλλα καὶ κάρφεα τοὶ παῖδες τοὺς 
ἄνδρας βαλλίζοντι, οἷόν περ φαντί, φίλα, τοὺς Τρῶας τὸν 

y+ “a A) Ν Ν 5 aA 5 ,ὔ ε 
15 AlavTa τῷ παλῷ. καὶ γὰρ ἐνταῦθα ἐπίχαρις ἡ παρα- 

“ΟΊ Ὁ \ Ν nan 4 ν la} 

Bohn ἐστι, καὶ τοὺς Τρῶας διαπαίζουσα ὥσπερ παῖδας. 

148. Ἔστι δέ τις ἰδίως χάρις Σαπφικὴ ἐκ μεταβολῆς, 
Ψ > ~ /, Ν᾽ Ψ , 
ὁταν τι εἰποῦσα μεταβάλληται Kal ὥσπερ μετανοήσῃ, 
οἷον “ὕψου δή, φησί, “τὸ μέλαθρον ἀέρατε τέκτονες" γαμ- 

20 βρὸς εἰσέρχεται ἶσος ᾿Αρηϊ, ἀνδρὸς μεγάλου πολλῷ 
/ νὰ 3 4 ε “ Ψ 3 4 3 4 
μείζων, ὥσπερ ἐπιλαμβανομένη ἑαυτῆς, ὅτι ἀδυνάτῳ ἐχρή- 
ε cs) NY & > \ ay ow y 5 ’ 
σατο ὑπερβολῇ, καὶ ὅτι οὐδεὶς τῷ ᾿Αρηΐ ἴσος ἐστίν. 

149. Τοῦ δὲ αὐτοῦ εἴδους καὶ τὸ παρὰ Τηλεμάχῳ, 
Ψ «ὃ ’ ΄ ὃ δέ Ν A AN Ν ὃ 4 Ν ἊΣ 
ὅτι “δύο κύνες δεδέατο πρὸ τῆς αὐλῆς, καὶ δύναμαι καὶ τὰ 
3 / 3 lal lo an 3 Ν la δ 4 

“ὀνόματα εἰπεῖν τῶν κυνῶν. ἀλλὰ τί ἂν por βούλοιτο 

t κόβαλος] Wilamowitzius, κόλακὸς P. I5 πλω, α supra versum addito 


P. 18 μεταβάλλεται et μετανοήσει, ἡ bis supra versum scripto P. 19 ὕψου] 
edd., νίψω P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 141 


and a rogue!’ Here the charm is due to the fact that the 
bird is upbraided as though it were a person, and that the 
writer has called the bird by unusual names. Such graces 
as these are due to the language pure and simple. 

146. Grace may also spring from the use of imagery. 
Thus Sappho says of the man that stands out among his 
fellows :— 

Pre-eminent, as mid alien men is Lesbos’ bard’. 
In this line charm rather than grandeur is the outcome of the 
comparison. It would have been possible, had the aim been 
different, to speak of a superiority such as the moon or the 
sun possesses in brightness over the other orbs, or to use 
some still more poetical image. 

147. The same point is illustrated by Sophron, who 
writes :— 

See, dear, what rain of leaf and spray 
The boys upon the men are showering, 
Thick as flew Trojan darts, they say, 
At Aias huge in battle towering®. 
Here again there is charm in the comparison, which makes 
game of the Trojans as though they were boys. 

148. There is a peculiarly Sapphic grace due to recanta- 
tion. Sometimes Sappho will say a thing and then recant, as 
though she had a fit of repentance. For example: 

High uprear the raftered hall, 

Builders, of the bridal dwelling ! 

The bridegroom comes, as Ares tall— 

A tall man’s stature far excelling*. 
She checks herself, as it were, feeling that she has used an 
impossible hyperbole, since no one is as tall as Ares. 

149. The same feature appears in the story of Tele- 
machus: ‘Two hounds were fastened in front of the court. 
I can tell you the very names of the hounds. But what use 
would it be for me to tell you their names*?’ The narrator, 


J See line. 2 Sappho, /ragm. 92, Bergk*. 
5. Sophron, Frag. 32, Kaibel C. G. F. 4 Sappho, Fragm. 91, Bergk+. 
Pa creme: 


142 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


Ng an ) \ \ a ΄ Ny 
τὰ ὀνόματα ταῦτα; καὶ yap οὗτος μεταβαλλόμενος μεταξὺ 
ἠστεΐσατο καὶ ἀποσιγήσας τὰ ὀνόματα. 

150. Καὶ ἀπὸ στίχου δὲ ἀλλοτρίου γίνεται χάρις, ὡς 
εὐ. ,ὔ , Ν 4 ν 9 Lal 
(6) Apiotodavys σκώπτων TOV TOV Δία, OTL OV κεραυνοι 

ΝΑ 4 , 

5 TOUS πονηρούς, φησίν, 

ἀλλὰ τὸν ἑαυτοῦ νεὼ βάλλει, καὶ Σούνιον ἄκρον ᾿Αθηνῶν. 
ὥσπερ γοῦν οὐκέτι ὁ Ζεὺς κωμῳδεῖσθαι δοκεῖ, add 
ν Ν ε /) ε ε / ΝᾺ 5 Ν ’ὕ 
Ὅμηρος καὶ ὁ στίχος ὁ Ομηρικὸς, καὶ ἀπὸ τούτου 

4 > Ν ec , 
πλείων ἐστὶν ἢ χάρις. 

10 151. Ἔχουσι δέ τι στωμύλον καὶ ἀλληγορίαι τινές, 
ὥσπερ τό, “" Δελφοί, παιδίον ὑμῶν a κύων φέρει. καὶ τὰ 

΄ \ Y pS an , (ae) θ (ὃ > 3 Ν 3 Ξ 
Σώφρονος δὲ τὰ ἐπὶ τῶν γερόντων, “ ἐνθάδε ὧν | κἠγὼ παρ᾽ 237 

ν Ν ε 4 > ΄ 4 4 4 
ὕμμε τοὺς ὁμότριχας ἐξορμίζομαι, πλόον δοκάζων πόντιον" 
5 4 Ν » “ὦ lal Ν Ξ», ᾽ y 5 Ν 
ἀρτέαι γὰρ ἤδη τοῖς ταλικοῖσδε ταὶ ἀγκυραι" ὅσα TE ἐπὶ 

an ἴω 5 lal ec 5 5 5 , « “ 

15 τῶν γυναικῶν ἀλληγορεῖ, οἷον ἐπ᾽ ἰχθύων, “ σωλῆνες, 
γλυκύκρεον κογχύλιον, χηρᾶν γυναικῶν λίχνευμα. καὶ 
μιμικώτερα τὰ τοιαῦτά ἐστι καὶ αἰσχρά. 

» 

152. Ἔστι δέ τις Kal ἡ παρὰ THY προσδοκίαν χάρις, 
ε ε ἴων , y ¢ ν » > 3 5 Ni 
ὡς ἡ τοῦ Κύκλωπος, ὅτι ‘ ὕστατον ἔδομαι Οὖτιν. ov γὰρ 

/ an 4 » 3 Ν » ε 5 

20 προσεδόκα τοιοῦτο ἕένιον οὔτε ᾿Οδυσσεὺς οὔτε ὁ ἀναγι- 

΄ ΝΕ 5 ΄ 2 N aA ΄ ‘ N 
νώσκων. καὶ ὁ ᾿Αριστοφάνης ἐπὶ TOV Σωκράτους, ‘ κηρὸν 
διατήξας;, φησίν, “ εἶτα διαβήτην λαβών, ἐκ τῆς παλαί- 

ε ’ὔὕ ε 7 ᾽ 
στρας ἱμάτιον ὑφείλετο. 
153. Ἤδη μέντοι ἐκ δύο τόπων ἐνταῦθα ἐγένετο ἡ 


25 χάρις. οὐ γὰρ παρὰ προσδοκίαν μόνον ἐπηνέχθη, ἀλλ᾽ 


4 ποῦ Ρ. 6 ἀκρον ex ἀκρων Ρ. Io στομύλον Ρ. 11 δελφοῖ Ρ. 
12 ἐνθάδε ὧν] Schneiderus, ἐνθαδεον P. 13 πόντιον" ἀρτέαι] Kaibelius, 
ποντίναι Ῥ. 14 ταλίκοις δέται Ῥ. τό λίχνευμα] ap. Athen. iii. 86, 
ἰχνεύμασι P. 17 μιμικώτερα] Victorius, μιμητικώτερα P, yp. καὶ μικρότερα in 


margine P. 1g κύκλοπος Ρ. 20 ἕξένειον Ῥ. 25 ἐπινψέχθη Ρ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 143 


with this sudden turn, puts you off by means of a jest, and 
fails to disclose the names. 

150. Charm may also spring from a reference to the 
verses of another writer. Aristophanes somewhere, when 
mocking at Zeus because he does not smite sinners with his 
thunderbolt, says :— 

Nay, his own fane he smites, and his thunderbolt lights upon 

‘Sunium, Attica’s headland’’. 


In the end it seems as though it were not Zeus that is 
burlesqued, but Homer and the Homeric line; and this 
fact increases the charm. 

151. Certain veiled meanings, too, have a kind of 
piquancy about them, as in the words: ‘Delphians, that 
bitch of yours bears a child?’ Another example will be 
found in the words of Sophron with regard to the old 
men: ‘Here 1 too in your midst, whose hair like mine is 
white as snow, Wait, ready to put out to sea, until the fair 
wind blow, Yea for the old the word is still, ‘The anchor’s 
weighed,’ I trow*.’ Similar allegories refer to women, as the 
following in which fish are in question: ‘razor-fish, and 
oysters sweet, The widow-woman’s dainty meat*.’ Such jests 
are gross and suited only to the lower varieties of drama. 

152. There is also some charm in the unexpected, as in 
the Cyclops’ words: ‘Noman will I eat last®’ A guest-gift 
of this kind was as little expected by Odysseus as it is by the 
reader. So Aristophanes says of Socrates that he first melted 
some wax, and 


A pair of compasses the sage then grabbed, 
And from the wrestling-ground—a coat he nabbed’. 


153. The charm in these instances is derived from two 
sources. Such pleasantries are not only added unexpectedly, 


1 Aristoph. WVzd. 401, 
ἀλλὰ τὸν αὑτοῦ γε νεὼν βάλλει καὶ Σούνιον ἄκρον ᾿Αθηνέων. 
Hom. Oadyss. iii. 278, 
ἀλλ᾽ ὅτε Σούνιον ἱρὸν ἀφικόμεθ᾽, ἄκρον ᾿Αθηνέων. 
2 Lyric. Fragm. Adesp., Bergk? iii. pp. 742, 743. 
3 Sophron, Fragm. 52, Kaibel C. G. F. 4 Sophron, Fragm. 24, Kaibel. 
5 Hom. Odyss. ix. 369. 8 Aristoph. Vz. 149, 179. 


on 


Io 


on 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


30 


144 ΔΗΛΛΗΤΡΙΟῪ ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


5 » 
οὐδ᾽ ἠκολούθει τοῖς προτέροις: ἡ δὲ τοιαύτη ἀνακολουθία 

ἴω “ ν ε Ν ᾽ὔ ε ’ὔὕ 
καλεῖται γρῖφος, ὥσπερ ὁ παρὰ Σώφρονι ῥητορεύων 

4 5 Ν Ν 5 / ε ΄“ 4 ἊΝ Ν 
Βουλίας. οὐδὲν γὰρ ἀκόλουθον αὑτῷ λέγει: καὶ παρὰ 

’ Lat 
Μενάνδρῳ δὲ 6 πρόλογος τῆς Μεσσηνίας. 

154. Πολλάκις δὲ καὶ κῶλα ὅμοια ἐποίησεν χάριν, 
ὡς ὃ ᾿Αριστοτέλης, “ἐκ μὲν ᾿Αθηνῶν, φησίν, “ ἐγὼ εἰς 
Στάγειρα ἦλθον διὰ τὸν βασιλέα τὸν μέγαν: ἐκ δὲ 
ὯΝ / 5 3 ͵ ὃ Ν Ν “ Ν / > 
Σταγείρων εἰς ᾿Αθήνας dua τὸν χειμῶνα τὸν μέγαν. 

΄ Ν 5 > / a ΄ὔ 5 Ν SEEN 
καταλήξας γὰρ ἐν ἀμφοτέροις τοῖς κώλοις εἰς τὸ αὐτὸ 
ὄνομα ἐποίησεν τὴν χάριν. ἐὰν δ᾽ οὖν ἀποκόψῃς τοῦ 
ἑτέρου κώλου τὸ “μέγαν, συναφαιρεῖται καὶ ἡ χάρις. 
\ /) Ν 5 7 ae, 

155. Καὶ κατηγορίαι δὲ ἀποκεκρυμμέναι ἐνίοτε 
ε ἴων ͵7͵ ν Ν — ἴων GCG 4 
ὁμοιοῦνται χάρισιν, ὥσπερ παρὰ Ξενοφῶντι ὁ Ἡρακλείδης 
ὁ παρὰ τῷ Σεύθει προσιὼν τῶν συνδείπνων ἑκάστῳ, καὶ 

/ A , ν 4 [πὰ Ν Ν 72 
πείθων δωρεῖσθαι Σεύθει ὃ τι ἔχοι: ταῦτα γὰρ καὶ χάριν 
τινὰ ἐμφαίνει, καὶ κατηγορίαι εἰσὶν ἀποκεκρυμμέναι. 

156. Αἱ μὲν οὖν κατὰ τὴν ἑρμηνείαν χάριτες τοσαῦται 
καὶ οἱ τόποι, ἐν δὲ τοῖς πράγμασι λαμβάνονται χάριτες 
ἐκ παροιμίας. φύσει γὰρ χάριεν πρᾶγμά ἐστι παροιμία, 
ΠΡ ΤΩ , ane) ΄ >» a QS , ΄ ᾽ 
ὡς ὁ Σώφρων μέν, ‘ Ηπιόλης, ἔφη, ‘0 τὸν πατέρα πνίγων. 

Ν 5 , , (j 2 “ y+ \ Ν 72 
καὶ ἀλλαχόθι πού φησιν, " ἐκ τοῦ ὄνυχος yap τὸν λέοντα 
ἔγραψεν: τορύναν ἔξεσεν: κύμινον ἔπρισεν. καὶ yap 
δυσὶ παροιμίαις καὶ τρισὶν ἐπαλλήλοις χρῆται, ὡς ἐπι- 
πληθύωνται αὐτῷ αἱ χάριτες: σχεδόν τε πάσας ἐκ τῶν 
δραμάτων αὐτοῦ τὰς παροιμίας ἐκλέξαι ἐστίν. 

157. Καὶ μῦθος δὲ λαμβανόμενος καιρίως εὐχαρίς 
ἐστιν, ἤτοι ὁ κείμενος, ὡς ὁ ᾿Αριστοτέλης ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀετοῦ 
φησιν, ὅτι λιμῷ θνήσκει ἐπικάμπτων τὸ ῥάμφος: πάσχει 

Ν 5 ,ὔ ν ” y 5 , 4 ε Ν 
δὲ αὐτό, ὅτι ἄνθρωπος wv ποτε ἠδίκησεν ἕένον. ὁ μὲν 


οὖν τῷ κειμένῳ μύθῳ κέχρηται καὶ κοινῳ. 


3 αὐτὸ Ρ. 11 συναφερεῖται Ρ. 15 ὅτι] Schneiderus, 6 τις P. 
17 περὶ τῶν ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν χαρίτων titulus in P. 10 χαρίεν Ῥ. 20 Ἢπιό- 
Ans] Kaibelius, ἐπίης Ρ. 22 ἔπρισεν] Hemsterhusius, ἔσπειρεν P. | on κύριον 
ὄνομα in margine P. 23, 24 ἐπιπληθύονται P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 145 


but they have no sort of connexion with what precedes them. 
Such want of sequence is called ‘griphus’; and an example 
of it is furnished by Boulias in Sophron’s mime, who delivers 
an utterly incoherent speech. Another instance is the pro- 
logue of Menander’s ‘Woman of Messenia.’ 

154. Again, a similarity in the members of a sentence 
often produces a graceful effect, as when Aristotle says: 
‘I went from Athens to Stageira because of the great king, 
and from Stageira to Athens because of the great storm’ 
It is through ending both members with the same word 
(μέγαν) that he produces this pleasant effect. If from either 
member you strike out the word ‘great, the charm thereupon. 
vanishes. 

155. Persiflage can sometimes be made to resemble 
urbanity. In Xenophon, for example, Heracleides who is 
with Seuthes approaches each of the guests at table and 
urges him to give whatever he can to Seuthes?. There is 
a certain urbanity in this, and persiflage at the same time. 

156. Such are the graces which appertain to style, and 
such the sources from which they are derived. Among the 
graces which relate to subject-matter we must reckon those 
which spring from the use of proverbs. By its very nature 
there is a certain piquancy in a proverb. Sophron, for 
instance, speaks of ‘Epioles who throttled his sire*’ And 
elsewhere: ‘He has painted the lion from the claw; he has 
polished a ladle; he has skinned a flint*’ Sophron employs 
two or three proverbs in succession, so as to load his style 
with elegances. Almost all the proverbs in existence might 
be collected out of his plays. 

157. A fable also, when neatly introduced, is very piquant. 
The fable may be a long-established one, as when Aristotle 
says of the eagle: ‘It perishes of hunger, when its beak grows 
more and more bent. This fate it suffers because once when 
it was human it broke the laws of hospitality®.’ He thus makes 
use of a familiar fable which is common property. 


1 Aristot. Frag. 669: cp. § 29 supra. 2 Xen. Anab. vii. 3, 15 ff. 
3 Sophron, Fragm. 68, Kaibel. 4 Sophron, Fragm. 110, Kaibel. 
° Aristot. Hist. Anim. Book ix. (vol. 1. p. 619 ed. Berol.). 


R. 10 


146 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


158. Πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ προσπλάσσομεν προσφόρους 

Ἃ an 
Kal οἰκείους τοῖς πράγμασιν, ὥσπερ τις περὶ αἰλούρου 
λέγων, ὅτι συμφθίνει τῇ σελήνῃ καὶ] ὁ αἴλουρος καὶ 
συμπαχύνεται, προσέπλασεν, ὅτι “ἔνθεν καὶ ὁ μῦθός 
5 ἐστιν, ὧς ἡ σελήνη ἔτεκεν τὸν αἴλουρον"᾿ οὐ γὰρ μόνον 

3 5 Ν \ ip » ε , 5 \ Ν ε Lal 
κατ᾽ αὐτὴν τὴν πλάσιν ἔσται ἡ χάρις, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ μῦθος 
ἐμφαίνει χάριέν τι, αἴλουρον ποιῶν σελήνης παῖδα. 

159. Πολλάκις δὲ καὶ ἐκ φόβου ἀλλασσομένου 

4 ᾽ὔ ν nan «A “ Ν c / 
γίνεται χάρις, ὅταν | διακενῆς τις φοβηθῃ, οἷον τὸν ἱμάντα 
10 ὡς ὄφιν ἢ TOV κρίβανον ὡς χάσμα τῆς γῆς, ἅπερ καὶ 
αὐτὰ κωμῳδικώτερά ἐστιν. 

160. Καὶ εἰκασίαι δ᾽ εἰσὶν εὐχάριτες, ἂν τὸν ἀλεκ- 

/ / > / ν \ 4 5 Ν 4 
Tpvova Μήδῳ εἰκάσῃς, ὅτι τὴν κυρβασίαν ὀρθὴν φέρει: 

lal , Ψ , , 5 “Ὁ Ψ 4 5 
βασιλεῖ δέ, ὅτι πορφύρεός ἐστιν, ἣ ὅτι βοήσαντος ἀλεκ- 
15 τρυόνος ἀναπηδῶμεν, ὥσπερ καὶ βασιλέως βοήσαντος, 
ἊΣ fp 
καὶ φοβούμεθα. 

161. “Ex δὲ ὑπερβολῶν χάριτες μάλιστα αἱ ἐν ταῖς 
κωμῳδίαις, πᾶσα δὲ ὑπερβολὴ ἀδύνατος, ws ᾿Αριστοφάνης 
a) \ an 5 ὔ nan an Ψ G 2 an 
ἐπὶ τῆς ἀπληστίας τῶν Περσῶν φησιν, ὅτι ‘wmTovv βοῦς 

/ 5 Ν » ᾿ 5 \ \ “ Tol Y 7 
20 κριβανίτας ἀντὶ ἄρτων. ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν Θρᾳκῶν ἕτερος, ὅτι 
“Μηδόκης ὁ βασιλεὺς βοῦν ἔφερεν ὅλον ἐν γνάθῳ." 

162. Τοῦ δὲ αὐτοῦ εἴδους καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐστιν, 

G8 4 4 ᾽ \ « / DOL ? Ν 
ὑγιέστερος κολοκύντης, καὶ “ φαλακρότερος εὐδίας, καὶ 

Ν Ν ¢ Ν (ὃ τὸ vA » 
τὰ Σαπφικὰ “πολὺ πακτίδος ἀδυμελεστέρα, χρυσοῦ χρυ- 
25 σοτέρα. πᾶσαι γὰρ αἱ τοιαῦται χάριτες ἐκ τῶν ὑπερ- 

ἴων ΄ , t} 
βολῶν εὕρηνται. [καί τι διαφέρουσι] 

163. Διαφέρουσι δὲ τὸ γελοῖον καὶ εὔχαρι πρῶτα 
μὲν τῇ ὕλῃ: χαρίτων μὲν γὰρ ὕλη νυμφαῖοι κῆποι, ἔρωτες, 
ἅπερ οὐ γελᾶται: γέλωτος δὲ Ἶρος καὶ Θερσίτης. τοσοῦ- 

> ny 
30 TOV οὖν διοίσουσιν, ὅσον ὃ Θερσίτης του Kparos. 


3 καὶ seclusi. 4 προσέπλασεν] Victorius, πρὸς ἔπλασσεν P. 7 αἰέλουρον, 
€ punctis notato P. 9 φοβηθῇ] Schneiderus, φοβῆ P. 19 ἀπλειστίας P. | Bods: 
B in ras. P (ἄρτους fort. scribebat corr. nescio quis). 24 πολυπακτίδος P. | adv- 
μελέστερα P. 24, 25 χρυσότερα P. 56 verba καί τι διαφέρουσι secl. Spengelius 
ex margine nata esse ratus coll. titulo § 30. 29 supra tpos scriptum est epws 
atram evan. in P. 


237" 


DEMETRIUS ON STVLE | 147 


158. We can often invent fables of our own apposite to 
the matter in hand. A writer once referred to the belief that 
cats thrive or pine according as the moon waxes or wanes, 
and then added of his own invention ‘whence the fable that 
the moon gave birth to the cat*’ The charm does not simply 
depend on the actual trick of invention, but the fable itself 
sparkles with a certain charm, making the cat the child of the 
moon. 

159. Charm is often the result of a revulsion from fear, 
as when a man groundlessly fears a strap mistaking it for a 
snake, or a pan mistaking it for an opening in the ground. 
Such mistakes are rather comic in themselves. 

160. Comparisons, also, are full of charm—if (for in- 
stance) you compare a cock to a Persian because of its stiff- 
upstanding crest, or to the Persian king because of its brilliant 
plumage or because when the cock crows we start with fear as 
though we heard the loud call of the monarch. 

161. The charms of comedy arise specially from hyper- 
boles, and every hyperbole is of an impossible character, as 
when Aristophanes says of the voracity of the Persians that 

For loaves, they roasted oxen whole in pipkins’ ; 
and of the Thracians another writer says ‘ Medoces their king 
was bearing a bullock whole between his teeth*,’ 

162. Of the same kind are such expressions as ‘lustier 
than a pumpkin’ and ‘balder than the cloudless blue’; and 
the lines of Sappho 

Far sweeter-singing than a lute, 
More golden than all gold’. 
All these ornaments, different as they are from one another, 
have their source in hyperbole. 

163. The humorous and the charming must not be 
confused. They differ, first of all, in their material. The 
materials of charm are the Gardens of the Nymphs, Loves, 
things not meant for laughter; while laughter is provoked 
by Irus or Thersites. They will differ, therefore, as much 
as Thersites differs from the God of Love. 


fSciw lnc 2 Aristoph. Ach. 86. 
$)Ser, Inc: 4 Sappho, Fragmm. 122, 123 (Bergk*). 


IO—2 


σι 


1ο 


- 
σσι 


30 


148 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


΄ Ν Ν “a / 5 “ Ν. Ν \ 
164. Διαφέρουσι δὲ καὶ TH λέξει αὐτῇ. τὸ μὲν γὰρ 
Ν /, “ 
εὔχαρι μετὰ κόσμου ἐκφέρεται καὶ Ov ὀνομάτων καλῶν, 
ἃ μάλιστα ποιεῖ τὰς χάριτας, οἷον τὸ “ποικίλλεται μὲν 
γαῖα πολυστέφανος᾽ καὶ τὸ “χλωρηὶς ἀηδών" τὸ δὲ 
γελοῖον καὶ ὀνομάτων ἐστὶν εὐτελῶν καὶ κοινοτέρων, 
Ψ » ε΄ Ν 5 ’ὔ Ν / > ΄ὔ 
ὥσπερ ἔχει: “ὅσον γὰρ αὐτίτης καὶ μονώτης εἰμί, φιλο- 
μυθότερος γέγονα." 

165. Ἔπειτα ἀφανίζεται ὑπὸ τοῦ κόσμου τῆς ἑρμη- 
νείας, καὶ ἀντὶ γελοίου θαῦμα γίνεται. αἱ μέντοι χάριτές 
5 Ν 4 Ν Ν : /, Ν / ν ᾽7ὔ 
εἰσι μετὰ σωφροσύνης, τὸ δὲ ἐκφράζειν τὰ γέλοια ὅμοιόν 

ἐστι καὶ καλλωπίζειν πίθηκον. 

166. Διὸ καὶ ἢ Σαπφὼ περὶ μὲν κάλλους ἀδουσα 

», 5 Ν ε “ Ν Ν 5 , Qa \ » 
καλλιεπής ἐστι καὶ ἡδεῖα, καὶ περὶ ἐρώτων δὲ καὶ ἔαρος 
Ν Ν ε , ἊΝ Ψ Ν » :). 2 
καὶ περὶ ἀἁλκυόνος, καὶ ἅπαν καλὸν ὄνομα ἐνύφανται 
αὐτῆς τῇ ποιήσει, τὰ δὲ καὶ αὐτὴ εἰργάσατο. 

167. ἤΛλλως δὲ σκώπτει τὸν ἄγροικον νυμφίον, καὶ 
τὸν θυρωρὸν τὸν ἐν τοῖς γάμοις, εὐτελέστατα καὶ ἐν πεζοῖς 
ὀνόμασι μᾶλλον ἢ ἐν ποιητικοῖς, ὥστε αὐτῆς μᾶλλόν ἐστι 

Ν ΄ la) / λιν 509 ἃ ε , 
τὰ ποιήματα ταῦτα διαλέγεσθαι ἣ adew, οὐδ᾽ ἂν ἁρμόσαι 
πρὸς τὸν χορὸν ἢ πρὸς τὴν λύραν, εἰ μή τις εἴη χορὸς 
διαλεκτικός. 

168. Μάλιστα δὲ διαφέρουσι καὶ ἐκ τῆς προαιρέσεως" 
οὐ γὰρ ὅμοια προαιρεῖται ὁ εὐχάριστος καὶ ὁ γελωτο- 

“ > 9. 76 \ > / c δὲ λ An Ν > Ν 
ποιῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ μὲν εὐφραίνειν, ὁ δὲ γελασθῆναι. καὶ ἀπὸ 

an ΕῚ 4 , A“ \ Ἂν ͵΄ an Ν 
τῶν ἐπακολουθούντων δέ: τοῖς μὲν γὰρ γέλως, τοῖς δὲ 
ἔπαινος. 

169. Καὶ ἐκ τόπου. ἔνθα μὲν γὰρ γέλωτος τέχναι 
καὶ χαρίτων, ἐν σατύρῳ καὶ ἐν κωμῳδίαις. τραγῳδία δὲ 
, Ν , > Ar ἴων ε δὲ aN 5 θ Ν 
χάριτας μὲν παραλαμβάνει ἐν πολλοῖς, ὁ δὲ γέλως ἐχθρὸς 
τραγῳδίας. οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐπινοήσειεν ἂν τις τραγῳδίαν παΐί- 

Ν , 
ζουσαν, ἐπεὶ σάτυρον γράψει ἀντὶ τραγῳδίας. 
6 fort. ὅσῳ. Io γέλοϊα P. Ir πίθηκον: cin ras. P. 13 ἔαρος] Galeus, 


ἀέρος P. 14 ἁλκύονος P. 16 ἀγρυκον P. 28 τί ποιοῦσιν οἱ σάτυροι τὰ 
λυπηρὰ οὕτως λέγοντες ὥστε γελωτοποιεῖν in margine P. 30, 31 πέζουσαν Ῥ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 149 


164. They differ, further, in actual expression. The 
idea of charm is evolved as an accompaniment to ornament 
and by means of beautiful words, which conduce most of all 
to charm. For instance: ‘ Earth myriad-garlanded is rainbow- 
hued, and ‘the paley-olive nightingale’ Humour, on the 
other hand, employs common and ordinary words, as in the 
sentence: ‘the more solitary and self-centered I am, the 
more myth-enamoured I become?’ 

165. Moreover, a pleasantry loses its character and be- 
comes incongruous when adorned by style. Graces of style 
must be employed with discretion. To utter a mere jest 
ornately is like beautifying an ape. 

166. When Sappho celebrates the charms of beauty, she 
does so in lines that are themselves beautiful and sweet. So 
too when she sings of love, and springtime, and the halcyon. 
Every lovely word is inwoven with the texture of her poetry. 
And some are of her own invention. 

167. It isin a different key that she mocks the clumsy 
bridegroom, and the porter at the wedding. Her language is 
then most ordinary, and couched in terms of prose rather than 
of poetry. These poems of hers are, in consequence, better 
suited for use in conversation than for singing. They are 
by no means adapted for a chorus or a lyre,—unless indeed 
there is such a thing as a conversational chorus. 

168. The two kinds of style under consideration differ 
most of all in their purpose, the aims of the wit and the 
buffoon being different. The one desires to give pleasure, the 
other to be laughed at. The results, likewise, are different,— 
mirth in the one case, commendation in the other, 

169. Again, the provinces of the two kinds do not 
coincide. There is, indeed, one place in which the arts of 
mirth and of charm are found together, in the satyric drama 
and in comedy. It is different, however, with tragedy, which 
everywhere welcomes elegances, but finds in mirth a sworn 
foe. A man could hardly conceive the idea of composing a 
sportive tragedy; if he did so, he would be writing a satyric 
play rather than a tragedy. 

1 Cp. § 133 supra. 2 Cp. § 144 supra. 


150 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


170. Χρήσονται δέ ποτε καὶ ot φρόνιμοι γελοίους 
πρός τε τοὺς καιρούς, οἷον ἐν ἑορταῖς καὶ ἐν συμποσίοις, 
Ν 5 3 / Ν Ν Ν / ε ε 
καὶ ἐν ἐπιπλήξεσιν δὲ πρὸς τοὺς τρυφερωτέρους, ὡς ὁ 
\ 4 ἊΝ ε / la Ν An 
τηλαυγὴς θύλακος, Kal ἡ Κράτητος ποιητική, | καὶ φακῆς 
Xd a ay an 
ἐγκώμιον ἂν ἀναγνῷ τις ἐν τοῖς ἀσώτοις: τοιοῦτος δὲ ὡς 


on 


Ν 4 Ν ε Ν / Ν \ ἴω ἴων 
τὸ πλέον καὶ ὁ Κυνικὸς τρόπος" τὰ γὰρ τοιαῦτα γελοῖα 
/ ’ὔ Ἂν 4 
χρείας λαμβάνει τάξιν Kal γνώμης. 
171. Ἔστι δὲ καὶ τοῦ ἤθους τις ἔμφασις ἐκ τῶν 
/ Ν “Ὁ / “Ὁ 5 ’, ε Ν Ν > 
γελοίων καὶ ἢ παιγνίας ἢ ἀκολασίας, ὡς καὶ τὸν οἶνον 
Ν ΄, > 4 c 4 > Ν > 7 ) ε Ν 
10 τὸν προχυθέντα ἐπισχών τις “ Πηλέα ἀντὶ Οἰνέως. ἡ γὰρ 
> / ε Ν Ν 5 / Ν ε Ν > /, ἈΝ 
ἀντίθεσις ἡ περὶ τὰ ὀνόματα καὶ ἡ φροντὶς ἐμφαίνει τινὰ 
ψυχρότητα ἤθους καὶ ἀναγωγίαν. 
172. Περὶ δὲ σκωμμάτων μέν, οἷον εἰκασία τις ἐστιν" 
ἡ γὰρ ἀντίθεσις εὐτράπελος. χρήσονταί τε ταῖς τοιαύταις 
> , ε BIND ΄ 5. ἢ δ \ , 
15 εἰκασίαις, ὡς “Αἰγυπτία κληματίς, μακρὸν καὶ μέλανα, 
\ N ὦ , ΄ ? Ν a N 3 a 
καὶ τὸ “θαλάσσιον πρόβατον, τὸν μῶρον τὸν ἐν TH 
θαλάσσῃ. τοῖς μὲν τοιούτοις χρήσονται: εἰ δὲ μή, 
/ Ν 4 4 / 
φευξόμεθα TA σκώμματα ὥσπερ λοιδορίας. 
173. Ποιεῖ δὲ εὔχαριν τὴν ἑρμηνείαν καὶ τὰ λεγό- 
Q 2 ΄, Ε ΄ 3 Ἴ ἃ ΄ 4 
20 μενα καλὰ ὀνόματα. ὡρίσατο δ᾽ αὐτὰ Θεόφραστος οὕτως, 
, b) / /, ΕῚ Ν Ν Ν 3 ΧΝ EN Ν Ν y+ 
κάλλος ὀνόματός ἐστι TO πρὸς THY ἀκοὴν ἢ πρὸς τὴν οψιν 
ἡδύ, ἢ τὸ τῇ διανοίᾳ ἔντιμον. 
174. Πρὸς μὲν τὴν ὄψιν ἡδέα τὰ τοιαῦτα, ‘ ῥοδό- 
ΚΑ. ΄ / ) Ψ Ν ε la) ε ΄ “ 
χροον, “ ἀνθοφόρου χρόας. ὅσα γὰρ ὁρᾶται ἡδέως, ταῦτα 
Ν / / 3) Ν δὲ Ν 3 Ν ‘ 4 
καὶ λεγόμενα καλά ἐστι. πρὸς δὲ τὴν ἀκοὴν “Καλλί- 
3 an ᾽ ΄ Ν “ 4 4 
otpatos, ᾿Αννοῶν. ἢ τε yap τῶν λάμβδα σύγκρουσις 
ἠχῶδές τι ἔχει, καὶ ἡ τῶν νῦ γραμμάτων. 
175. Καὶ ὅλως τὸ νῦ dv εὐφωνίαν ἐφέλκονται ot 


τὸ 
σι 


2 ἑωρταῖς P. 2. τρυφεροτέρους P. 4 €vAakos, θύ supra ev add. P. 
5 αγνῶ, ἀν supra versum add. P. 10 ἐπίσχὼν τὰ σπήλαια, ν Supra versum 
addito, P. 21 περὶ κάλλους ὀνόματος καὶ ἐν τίσιν titulus in P. 22 ἢ supra 
versum scripsit P. 23, 24 poddxpwor P. 25 τὸν THY ἀκοὴν P. 26 ἄν- 
νοῶν ex ἀννοῶν Ρ. 27 ἠχῶδες: es Supra versum add. P. | νῦν P. 28 νῦ 
ex viv P. | εὐφωνίαν] Galeus, εὐφημίαν P. 


238° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 151 


170. Even sensible persons will indulge in jests on such 
occasions as feasts and carousals, or when they are addressing 
a word of warning to men inclined to good living. A refer- 
ence to ‘the far-gleaming meal-bag’ may then be found 
salutary. The same may be said of the poetry of Crates; 
and it would be well if you were to read the ‘ Praise of the 
Lentil’ in a party of free-livers. The Cynic humour is, for 
the most part, of this character. Such jests, in fact, play the 
part of maxims and admonitions. 

171. There is some indication of a man’s character 
in his jokes—in their playfulness, for instance, or their 
extravagance. Somebody once dammed the flow of wine 
which had been spilt on the ground and muttered words 
about ‘Oeneus (οἶνος) turned into Peleus (πηλός) The play 
on the proper names, and the laboured thought, betray a 
want of taste and breeding. 

172. In nicknames a sort of comparison is implied, 
there being wit in a play on words. Writers may use such 
comparisons as ‘Egyptian clematis’ of a tall and swarthy 
man, or ‘sea-wether’ of a fool on the water. They may, 
I say, indulge in harmless jokes such as these, but if we 
cannot stop there, we had better avoid nicknames as we 
would scurrility. 

173. The so-called ‘beautiful words’ also conduce to 
grace of diction. According to the definition given by Theo- 
phrastus, beauty in a word is that which appeals to the ear or 
the eye, or has noble associations of its ownt. 

174. Among expressions which call up pleasing images 
may be mentioned ‘roseate-glowing’ and ‘of blossom-laden 
hue. Everything that is seen with pleasure is also beautiful 
when uttered. Pleasing in sound are such names as ‘ Calli- 
stratus’ and ‘Annoon, in which the double ‘1, and the 
double ‘n,’ have a sort of resonance. 

175. In general, it is out of regard for euphony that the 


1 Theophrastus περὶ λέξεως. 


on 


Io 


= 
σι 


20 


25 


30 


152 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


3 Niue ΄ ) , NG , ᾽ a 
Αττικοὶ “Δημοσθένην᾽ λέγοντες Kat “Σωκράτην. τῇ 

, » Q A a A 
διανοίᾳ δὲ ἔντιμα τὰ τοιαῦτά ἐστιν, οἷον TO “ ἀρχαῖοι᾽ ἀντὶ 
τοῦ ‘mahauol’ ἐντιμότερον: οἱ γὰρ ἀρχαῖοι avdpes ἐντι- 
μότεροι. 

176. Παρὰ δὲ τοῖς μουσικοῖς λέγεταί τι ὄνομα λεῖον, 

NS, Ν 7 Ny > / NG ) / 
καὶ ἕτερον TO τραχύ, Kal ἀλλο εὐπαγές, καὶ ἀλλ᾽ ὀγκηρόν. 
λεῖον μὲν οὖν ἐστιν ὄνομα τὸ διὰ φωνηέντων ἢ πάντων 7 
ὃ \ ΄ @ Ἐῶ Ν \ Ὁ ΄ \ 

ua πλειόνων, οἷον Δίας, τραχὺ δὲ οἷον βέβρωκεν" καὶ 
αὐτὸ δὲ τοῦτο τὸ τραχὺ ὄνομα κατὰ μίμησιν ἐξενήνεκται 
ἑαυτοῦ. εὐπαγὲς δὲ ἐπαμφοτερίζον καὶ μεμιγμένον ἴσως 
τοῖς γράμμασιν. 

177. Τὸ δὲ ὀγκηρὸν ἐν τρισί, πλάτει, μήκει, πλά- 
σματι, οἷον βροντὰ ἀντὶ τοῦ βροντή: καὶ γὰρ τραχύτητα 
ἐκ τῆς προτέρας συλλαβῆς ἔχει, καὶ ἐκ τῆς δευτέρας 

“ Ν Ν Ν / / \ Ν x 
μῆκος μὲν διὰ THY μακράν, πλατύτητα δὲ διὰ TOV Awpt- 

, ΄ a \ , ε κ τ 
σμόν: πλατέα λαλοῦσι γὰρ πάντα οἱ Δωριεῖς. διόπερ 

5 \ 3 4 4, 5 ἊΝ lal 5 4 ε 
οὐδὲ ἐκωμῴδουν δωρίζοντες, ἀλλὰ πικρῶς ἠττίκιζον: ἡ 
γὰρ ᾿Αττικὴ γλῶσσα συνεστραμμένον τι ἔχει καὶ δη- 
μοτικὸν καὶ ταῖς τοιαύταις εὐτραπελίαις πρέπον. 

178. Ταῦτα μὲν δὴ παρατεχνολογείσθω ἄλλως. τῶν 
δὲ 3 ΄ 5 ΄, Ν A ΄ / ε ΄ 
ἑ εἰρημένων ὀνομάτων τὰ λεῖα μόνα ληπτέον ὡς γλαφυρόν 
τι ἔχοντα. 

179. Τίνεται δὲ καὶ ἐκ συνθέσεως τὸ γλαφυρόν: ἔστι 
μὲν οὖν οὐ ῥάδιον περὶ τοῦ τρόπου τοῦ τοιοῦδε εἰπεῖν' 
οὐδὲ γὰρ τῶν πρὶν εἴρηταί τινι περὶ yhadupas συνθέσεως. 
κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν δὲ ὅμως πειρατέον λέγειν. 

180. Taya γὰρ δὴ ἔσται τις ἡδονὴ καὶ χάρις, ἐὰν 
ε / 5 / \ , ν x ε 4 
ἁρμόζωμεν ἐκ μέτρων τὴν σύνθεσιν ἢ ὅλων ἢ ἡμίσεων" 
οὐ μὴν ὥστε φαίνεσθαι αὐτὰ μέτρα ἐν τῷ συνειρμῷ τῶν 

a y Ν 
λόγων, | ἀλλ᾽, εἰ διαχωρίζοι τις καθ᾽ ἕν ἕκαστον καὶ δια- 


΄ la δὴ ε > e¢ an 5 κι “ , ΕΥ̓ 
κρίνοι, τότε δὴ UP ἡμῶν αὐτῶν φωρᾶσθαι μέτρα ὄντα. 


4.» 5 ἐντιμότεροι post ἄνδρες inter versus add. P. 5 τί λεῖον ὄνομα, καὶ τί 
τραχύ, καὶ τί τὸ εὐπαγές, καὶ τί τὸ ὀγκηρὸν titulus in P. 10 ἐπαμφοτερίζων P. 
13 βροντᾶ P. 19 εὐτραπελείαις P. 25 τίνι Ρ. 28 ἀρμόζομεν P. 


31 φορᾶσθαι P. 


238" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 153 


Attic writers append an ‘n, and speak of Δημοσθένην and 
Σωκράτην (instead of Δημοσθένη and Σωκράτη). Among 
words with noble associations is ἀρχαῖοι (‘men of the olden 
time’), which is superior to παλαιοί (‘ancients’), since it 
implies greater respect. 

176. Musicians are accustomed to speak of words as 
‘smooth,’ ‘rough, ‘well-proportioned,’ ‘weighty.’ A smooth 
word is one which consists exclusively, or mainly, of vowels: 
eg. Αἴας. βέβρωκε is an instance of a rough word; and the 
very roughness of its formation is designed to imitate the 
action it describes. A well-proportioned word is one which 
partakes of both characters and shows a happy blending of 
various letters. 

177. Weight consists in three things: breadth, length, 
formation. βροντὰ (the Doric equivalent of βροντὴ) may 
serve as an example. This word derives roughness from the 
first syllable; and from the second it derives length owing to 
the long vowel, and breadth owing to the Doric form, the 
Dorians being accustomed to broaden all their words. This 
- is the reason why comedies were not written in Doric, but in 
the pungent Attic. The Attic dialect has about it something 
terse and popular, and so lends itself naturally to the plea- 
santries of the stage. 

178. But this is a mere digression in our treatise. Of 
all the words indicated, the smooth alone must be employed 
as possessing any elegance. 

179. Elegance may also be produced by composition, 
though it is to be sure not easy to describe the process. Yet, 
although no previous writer has treated of elegant com- 
position, I must endeavour to do so to the best of my 
ability. 

180. Well, a certain charm and grace will perhaps be 
attained if we frame the composition by measures—in whole 
measures or half-measures. The actual measures must not, 
however, force themselves on the attention, if the words 
be read connectedly, but if the sentence is divided and 
analyzed part by part, then and only then ought the presence 
of measures to be detected by us. 


or 


Io 


μι 
σι 


20 


25 


30 


154 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


181. Kay μετροειδῆ δὲ ἢ, THY αὐτὴν ποιήσει χάριν" 
λανθανόντως δέ τοι παραδύεται ἡ ἐκ τῆς τοιαύτης ἣδο- 
VHS χάρις, καὶ πλεῖστον μὲν τὸ τοιοῦτον εἶδός ἐστι παρὰ 

“Ὁ la Ν Ν 4 Ν Ν = 
τοις Iepurarntikots καὶ παρὰ Ἰίλάτωνι Kat παρὰ Zevo- 
“ Q ε / 4 \ Ν Ν ,ὕ 
φῶντι καὶ Ἡροδότῳ, τάχα δὲ καὶ παρὰ Δημοσθένει 

πολλαχοῦ: Θουκυδίδης μέντοι πέφευγε τὸ εἶδος. 

182. Παραδείγματα δὲ αὐτοῦ λάβοι τις ἂν τοιάδε, 
οἷον ὡς ὃ Δικαίαρχος: “ἐν ᾿Ελέᾳ, φησι, “τῆς ᾿Ιταλίας 

4, Ὑ Ν ε ΄ὔ κέ ) a Ν ’ὔ 

πρεσβύτην ἤδη τὴν ἡλικίαν ὄντα. τῶν γὰρ κώλων 
5 4 ε 5 / 4 yxy ε Ν Ν 
ἀμφοτέρων at ἀπολήξεις μετροειδές τι ἔχουσιν, ὑπὸ δὲ 
τοῦ εἱρμοῦ καὶ τῆς συναφείας κλέπτεται μὲν τὸ μετρικόν, 
ε \ 3 > > / » 

ἡδονὴ δ᾽ οὐκ ὀλίγη ἔπεστι. 

, , 3 “ ΕῚ “Ἵ n e wn 

183. Πλάτων μέντοι ἐν πολλοῖς αὐτῷ TO ῥυθμῷ yha- 
φυρός ἐστιν ἐκτεταμένῳ πως, καὶ οὔτε ἕδραν ἔχοντι οὔτε 
μῆκος: τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἰσχνὸν καὶ δεινόν, τὸ δὲ μῆκος με- 

, 9 3 a . 3 \ » \ n Ν 
γαλοπρεπές. ἀλλ᾽ οἷον ὀλίσθῳ τινὶ ἔοικε τὰ κῶλα, καὶ 
f25) 5 ΄ ΄, oP) ΄ ὩΣ 3 A Ν 
οὔτ᾽ ἐμμέτροις παντάπασιν οὔτ᾽ ἀμέτροις, οἷον ἐν τῷ περὶ 
a / 5 Ν ΩΣ ἢ lal δὴ ΩΝ 7 ) 
μουσικῆς λόγῳ ἐπὰν hy “νῦν δὴ ἐλέγομεν. 

184. Καὶ πάλιν, “ μινυρίζων τε καὶ γεγανωμένος ὑπὸ 
τῆς δῆς διατελεῖ τὸν βίον ὅλον. καὶ πάλιν, “τὸ μὲν 

ΝΥ » \ > ψ , . ) 
πρῶτον, εἴ TL θυμοειδὲς εἶχεν, ὥσπερ σίδηρον ἐμάλαξεν. 

4 Ν Ν Ν Ν 3 ἊΝ n 3 3 5 
οὕτως μὲν γὰρ γλαφυρὸν καὶ ὠδικὸν σαφῶς: εἰ δ᾽ ἀνα- 
΄ + ¢ 3 , Ὁ (ὃ > oR .ὃ na 
στρέψας εἴποις, “ἐμάλαξεν ὥσπερ σίδηρον, ἢἣ “διατελεῖ 
ὅλον τὸν βίον, ἐκχεῖς τοῦ λόγου τὴν χά ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ 
» ἐκχεῖς γου τὴν χάριν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ 
ε a > 3 δ N° A , 20> 9 las 
ῥυθμῷ οὖσαν: οὐ yap δὴ ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ, οὐδ᾽ ἐν ταῖς 
λέξεσιν. 

185. Καὶ περὶ τῶν μουσικῶν δὲ ὀργάνων πάλιν 

΄ 4 3 ®@ ὃ ΄ ( λ , ὃ ΄,΄ λ , 

χαριέντως ἥρμοσεν, ἐν οἷς δή φησιν, “λύρα δή σοι λεί- 
\ , eer) \ 3 ΄ » G \ , 

πεται κατὰ πόλιν" εἰ γὰρ ἀναστρέψας εἴποις ‘ κατὰ πόλιν 

λείπεται, μεθαρμοσαμένῳ ποιήσεις ὅμοιον. τοῦτο δὲ 


2 παραδοίεται Ῥ. 8 ἐλαία Ρ. 9 ὄντι Ρ. 11 συφείας κλέπται 
(va et er supra versum additis) P. 14 ἐκτεταμένῳ] Victorius, ἐκτεταμένος P. 
17 οὔτ᾽ éupérpos] C. F. Hermannus, οὔτε μέτροις P. 18 ἐπὰν φῇ] Spengelius, 
ἐπάμφω P. | ἐλέγομεν] Victorius e Plat., λέγομεν P. 24 ἐκχεῖς) Dahlius, 


ἐξέχεις P. | τῷ ins. Galeus. 28 ἥρμωσεν P. 30 μεθαρμωσαμένω Ρ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 155 


181. Even a general metrical character will produce the 
same effect. The charm of this pleasing device steals on us 
before we are aware. The trait is a favourite one with 
the Peripatetics as well as with Plato, Xenophon and 
Herodotus ; and it is found in many passages of Demosthenes. 
Thucydides, on the other hand, shuns it. 

182. An illustration of such writing may be quoted 
from Dicaearchus, who says: ‘At Elia in Italy sojourning, an 
old man now, and stricken in years!’ The close of each 
member has something of a metrical cadence, but the fact is 
disguised through the linking of the words in one series; and 
great charm results. 

183. Now Plato in many passages owes his elegance 
directly to the rhythm, which is, so to speak, long drawn out, 
and without basement or amplitude, of which the former 
suits the plain and forcible, the latter the elevated style. 
His members seem to glide along and to be neither alto- 
gether metrical nor unmetrical, as in the passage about 
music, beginning ‘as we were saying a moment ago? 

184. And again: ‘in warbling and revelling in song he 
passes his life wholly?” And once more: ‘should he see any 
symptom of passion, like steel would he temper it®’ Thus 
framed, the sentences are manifestly elegant and harmonious. 
But if you invert the order and say ‘he would temper it like 
steel’ or ‘he passes all his life” you will rob the language of 
its charm, which resides simply in the rhythm. Certainly 
it is not to be found in the thought, nor in the choice of 
words. 

185. Plato employs a delightful cadence, again, when 
saying with regard to musical instruments: ‘the lyre for you 
is left, then, in the town’. Invert the order and say ‘in the 
town is left for you, and you will be doing what is tantamount 
to changing the melody. He adds: ‘yea, and in the fields 


1 Dicaearchus, Frag. 33, Miiller 7. H. G. τι. p. 245. 
? Plat. Rep. 111. 411 A. 3 Plat. Rep. 111. 411 R. 4 Plat. Rep. 111 399 Ὁ. 


σι 


Io 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


156 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


ἐπιφέρει, “καὶ αὖ κατ᾽ ἀγροὺς τοῖς ποιμέσιν σύριγξ av 
τις εἴη" τῇ γὰρ ἐκτάσει καὶ τῷ μήκει πάνυ χαριέντως 
μεμίμηται τρόπον τινὰ ἦχον σύριγγος. ἔσται δὲ δῆλον, 
εἴ τις μετασυνθεὶς λέγοι καὶ τοῦτο. 

186. Περὶ μὲν δὴ τοῦ κατὰ σύνθεσιν γλαφυροῦ ἐπι- 
φαινομένου τοσαῦτα, ὡς ἐν δυσκόλοις. εἴρηται δὲ καὶ 
περὶ τοῦ χαρακτῆρος τοῦ γλαφυροῦ, ἐν ὅσοις καὶ ὅπως 
γίνεται. καθάπερ δὲ τῷ μεγαλοπρεπεῖ παρέκειτο ὁ ψυχρὸς 
χαρακτήρ, οὕτως τῷ γλαφυρῷ παράκειταί τις διημαρτη- 
μένος. ὀνομάζω δὲ αὐτὸν τῷ κοινῷ ὀνόματι κακόζηλον. 
γίνοιτο δ᾽ ἂν καὶ οὗτος ἐν τρισίν, ὥσπερ καὶ οἵ λοιποὶ 
πάντες. 

187. Ἔν διανοίᾳ μέν, ὡς 6 εἰπὼν ‘ Κένταυρος ἑαυτὸν 
ἱππεύων, καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ βουλευομένου ᾿Αλεξάνδρου δρόμον 
ἀγωνίσασθαι ᾿Ολυμπιάσιν ἔφη τις οὕτως: “᾿Αλέξανδρε, 
δράμε σοῦ τῆς μητρὸς τὸ ὄνομα. 

188. Ἔν δὲ ὀνόμασιν γίγνοιτ᾽ ἂν οὕτως, οἷον ‘ ἐγέλα 
που ῥόδον ἡδύχροον. ἢ τε γὰρ μεταφορὰ ἡ " ἐγέλα᾽ πάνυ 
μετάκειται ἀπρεπῶς, καὶ τὸ σύνθετον τὸ “"ἡδύχροον᾽ οὐδ᾽ 
ἐν ποιήματι θείη av τις ἀκριβῶς σωφρονῶν. ἢ ws τις 
εἶπεν, ‘Ort λεπταῖς ὑπεσύριζε πίτυς αὔραις. περὶ μὲν δὴ 
τὴν λέξιν οὕτως. 

189. Σύνθεσις δὲ ἀναπαιστικὴ | καὶ μάλιστα ἐοικυῖα 
τοῖς κεκλασμένοις καὶ ἀσέμνοις μέτροις, οἷα μάλιστα τὰ 
Σωτάδεια διὰ τὸ μαλακώτερον, " σκήλας καύματι κάλυψον,᾽ 
καὶ 

σείων μελίην Πηλιάδα δεξιὸν κατ᾽ ὦμον 
ἀντὶ τοῦ 


σείων Πηλιάδα μελίην κατὰ δεξιὸν ὦμον᾽ 


5 περὶ κακοζήλων titulus in P. 10 ὀνομάζω] Galeus, ὀνομάζει P. 
ΓΙ γίνοιτο] edd., γίνεται P. | on ὅτι καὶ τὸ κακόζηλον ἐν τρισὶν in margine P. 
13 ὁ supra versum add. P. 14 ἀλεξάνδρω P. 20 ὡς tts] edd., ὅστις Ρ. 
2t λεπταῖς] Radermacherus, δέ γε ταῖς P. | πήτοις P. 23 ἀναπαιστικῆ P. 
25 Σωτάδεια] Victorius, σώματα P. | σκείλας P. 


239° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 157 


for the shepherds some manner of pipe shall be!’ By this 
long unbroken clause he has, in a manner, quite charmingly 
imitated the sound of the pipe. This will be clear to anyone 
who changes the arrangement of this sentence also. 

186. With regard to elegance as depending on the 
arrangement of words these observations must suffice, the 
subject being difficult. We have also treated of the essential 
features of the elegant style, and have shown where and 
how it originates. We have seen that the frigid style is 
nearly allied to the elevated. In the same way there is a 
defective style perilously near to the elegant; and to this I 
give the current name of ‘affected. This, like all the rest, 
falls under three heads. 

187. The affectation may reside in the thought, as when 
a writer speaks of ‘a Centaur riding himself?” or as when 
somebody exclaimed on hearing that Alexander meant to 
enter for the races at Olympia, ‘ Alexander, race along your 
own mother’s name?!’ 

188. It may also be found in the words, as ‘smiled the 
dulcet-coloured rose. The metaphor ‘smiled’ is sadly out of 
place, and not even in poetry could the compound ‘ dulcet- 
coloured’ be employed by any man of correct judgment. 
This is true also of the words: ‘the pine was piping low to 
the gentle gales®’—Thus much with respect to expression. 

189. The structure of clauses is affected, when it is 
anapaestic and resembles most nearly such broken and un- 
dignified measures, as are particularly the Sotadean, with 
their effeminate gait, e.g. ‘having dried in the sun, cover up?’; 
and 


Upswinging the ash-beam Pelian his rightward shoulder above 
in place of 


Swinging the Pelian ash-beam over his rightward shoulder’. 


1 Plat. Ref. iii. 399 Ὁ. 2 Scr. Ine. 
3 Sotad. Fragm. 4 Hom. Z/. xxii. 133. 


σι 


10 


15 


20 


158 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


ὁποῖα γὰρ μεταμεμορφωμένῳ ἔοικεν ὁ στίχος, ὥσπερ 
ε 4 5 5 / / > ,ὔ 

οἱ μυθευόμενοι ἐξ ἀρρένων μεταβάλλειν εἰς θηλείας. τοσ- 

ἄδε μὲν καὶ περὶ κακοζηλίας. 


ΙΝ. 


100. “Emi δὲ τοῦ ἰσχνοῦ χαρακτῆρος ἔχοιμεν ἂν καὶ 
πράγματα ἴσως τινὰ μικρὰ καὶ τῷ χαρακτῆρι πρόσφορα, 
Ὁ N N ͵΄ ιν ὦ oy) an »» » 
οἷον τὸ παρὰ Λυσίᾳ, “ οἰκίδιον ἔστι μοι διπλοῦν, ἴσα ἔχον 
τὰ ἄνω τοῖς κάτω. τὴν δὲ λέξιν εἶναι πᾶσαν χρὴ κυρίαν 
καὶ συνήθη: μικρότερον γὰρ τὸ συνηθέστερον πάντων, 
τὸ δὲ ἀσύνηθες καὶ μετενηνεγμένον μεγαλοπρεπές. 
101. Καὶ μηδὲ διπλᾶ ὀνόματα τιθέναι: τοῦ γὰρ 
ἐναντίου χαρακτῆρος καὶ ταῦτα, μηδὲ μὴν πεποιημένα, 
3 ν »Μ 72 lal / Ν nA 
μηδ᾽ ὅσα ahha μεγαλοπρέπειαν ποιεῖ, μάλιστα δὲ: σαφὴ 
Ν Ν ᾽ὔ > Ν δὲ Ν 3 72) 
χρὴ τὴν λέξιν εἶναι. τὸ δὲ σαφὲς ἐν πλείοσιν. 
192. Πρῶτα μὲν ἐν τοῖς κυρίοις, ἔπειτα ἐν τοῖς συνδε- 
δεμένοις. τὸ δὲ ἀσύνδετον καὶ διαλελυμένον ὅλον ἀσαφὲς 
“ 2 δ ε ε ’, 4 5 Ν Ν \ , 
πᾶν: ἄδηλος yap ἡ ἑκάστου κώλου ἀρχὴ διὰ THY λύσιν, 
ὥσπερ τὰ Ἡρακλείτου: καὶ γὰρ ταῦτα σκοτεινὰ ποιεῖ 
τὸ πλεῖστον ἡ λύσις. ' 
193. Ἐναγώνιος μὲν οὖν ἴσως μᾶλλον ἡ διαλελυμένη 
/ ε > 5 Ν Ν ε Ν La) lal ἊΝ ε / 
λέξις, ἡ δ᾽ αὐτὴ καὶ ὑποκριτικὴ καλεῖται: κινεῖ γὰρ ὑπό- 
ε 4 Ν \ / ε > ,ὔ ν 
κρισιν ἡ λύσις. γραφικὴ δὲ λέξις ἡ εὐανάγνωστος. αὕτη 
δ᾽ ἐστιν ἡ συνηρτημένη καὶ οἷον ἠσφαλισμένη τοῖς συν- 
4 Ν n ΔΝ \ 4 ε 4 
δέσμοις. διὰ τοῦτο δὲ καὶ Μένανδρον ὑποκρίνονται hehv- 
4 5 wn , 4 Ν 5 / 
μένον ἐν τοῖς πλείστοις, Φιλήμονα δὲ ἀναγινώσκουσιν. 
ν Ν ε Ν ε 4 , 5 
194. O7v δὲ υποκριτικον Ἢ λύσις, παράδειγμα εγ- 
κείσθω τόδε, 


ἐδεξάμην, ἔτικτον, ἐκτρέφω, φίλε. 


2 ἀρένων P. 4 περὶ ἰσχνοῦ titulus in P, eadem verba in margine P. | 
ἔχοιμεν] Victorius, ἐκεῖ μὲν P. 6 ἔχων Ῥ. 8 πᾶν εχ πάντων, accentu 
mutato et punctis supra τῶν positis P. 9 ἀσύνηθες : o posterius in rasura P. 
13 ἐν ὅσοις τὸ σαφές in margine P. 25 περὶ ὑποκριτικῶν titulus in P. | ὑπο- 


κριτικὸν] edd., ὑποκριτικῶν P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 159 


The line seems transmuted as it were, like those who (so the 
fables tell us) are changed from males to females.—So much 
for the subject of affectation. 


CAVA ΠΞΙΝ JOY, 


190. In the case of the plain style, we can no doubt 
point to subject-matter which is homely and appropriate to 
the style itself, eg. the passage in Lysias, ‘I have a cottage 
with two storeys, the one above corresponding exactly to that 
below!’ The diction throughout should be current and fami- 
liar. An expression is homelier the more familiar it is, while 
the unusual and metaphorical is elevated. 

191. Compound words should not be admitted (since 
they are appropriate to the opposite variety of style), nor yet 
newly-coined words, nor any other words which contribute to 
elevation. Above all, the style should be lucid. Now lucidity 
involves a number of things. 

192. First of all it involves the employment of current 
words, and next of words bound together. Writing which is 
wholly disjointed gnd unconnected is entirely lacking in 
clearness. It is impossible to discern the beginning of each 
member owing to the looseness of the structure. This is 
illustrated by the writings of Heracleitus, the obscurity of 
which is due mainly to their loose structure. 

193. No doubt the disjointed style lends itself better to 
debate. It likewise bears the name of ‘histrionic, since a 
broken structure stimulates acting. On the other hand, the 
best ‘literary’ style is that which is pleasant to read; and 
this is the style which is compacted and (as it were) con- 
solidated by the conjunctions. This is the reason why, while 
Menander (whose style is for the most part broken) is 
popular with the actor, Philemon is the reader’s favourite. 

194. To show that the broken style suits the stage, take 
the following line as an instance :— 

Thee I received, I bare, I nurse, O dear one’. 


1 Lys. Zratosth. ad init. 
2 Menander, Fragm. 230: Meineke Iv. pp. 284, 285. 


σι 


Io 


20 


160 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


7 ἊΝ ’ὔ 3 , \ Ν Ν , 
οὕτως yap λελυμένον ἀναγκάσει καὶ τὸν μὴ θέλοντα 
ε 4 ἊΝ Ἂν 4 > Ν ’ aA 
ὑποκρίνεσθαι διὰ τὴν λύσιν: εἰ δὲ συνδήσας εἴποις, 
“ἐδεξάμην καὶ ἔτικτον καὶ ἐκτρέφω, πολλὴν ἀπάθειαν 

la ΄ a ’ὔ Ν Ν 5 Ν 5 
τοῖς συνδέσμοις συνεμβαλεῖς. πάνυ δὲ τὸ ἀπαθὲς ἀνυ- 
πόκριτον. 

195. Ἔστι δὲ καὶ ἄλλα θεωρήματα ὑποκριτικά, οἷον 

Ἃ ε Ν iS -; ᾽΄ὔ » ε ,ὔ ε / Ν las 
καὶ ὁ παρὰ τῷ ἙΕὐριπίδει Ἴων 6 τόξα ἁρπάζων Kat τῷ 
κύκνῳ ἀπειλῶν τῷ ὄρνιθι, ἀποπατοῦντι κατὰ τῶν ἀγαλμά- 
των; καὶ γὰρ κινήσεις πολλὰς παρέχει τῷ ὑποκριτῇ ὃ 
> Ν Ν ’ 7) Ν ε XN ἣν »}. “ὦ 5 ,ὔ la) 
ἐπὶ τὰ τόξα δρόμος καὶ ἡ πρὸς TOV ἀέρα ἀνάβλεψις τοῦ 
προσώπου διαλεγομένου τᾷ κύκνῳ, καὶ ἡ λοιπὴ πᾶσα 
διαμόρφωσις πρὸς τὸν ὑποκριτὴν πεποιημένη. ἀλλ᾽ οὐ 
περὶ ὑποκρίσεως ἡμῖν τὰ νῦν ὁ λόγος. 

196. Φευγέτω δὲ ἡ σαφὴς γραφὴ καὶ τὰς ἀμφιβολίας, 

J? \ {4 “a 5) 4 ia > lA 
σχήματι δὲ χρήσθω τῇ ἐπαναλήψει καλουμένῃ. ἐπανά- 

4 > 7) > Ν “ 5 “ 3 “A N 
Anus δέ ἐστι συνδέσμου ἐπιφορὰ τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐν τοῖς διὰ 
μακροῦ ἐπιφερομένοις λόγοις, οἷον “ὅσα μὲν ἔπραξε 
Φίλιππος, καὶ ὡς τὴν Θρᾷκην κατεστρέψατο, καὶ Χερρό- 
νῆσον εἷλεν, καὶ Βυζάντιον ἐπολιόρκησεν, καὶ ᾿Αμφίπολιν 

3 3 lA le} Ν ’, ) Ν S ε \ 
οὐκ ἀπέδωκεν, ταῦτα μὲν παραλείψω. σχεδὸν yap ὁ μὲν 
σύνδεσμος ἐπενεχθεὶς ἀνέμνησεν ἡμᾶς τῆς προθέσεως, 
καὶ ἀπεκατέστησεν ἐπὶ τὴν ἀρχήν. 

197. Σαφηνείας δὲ ἕνεκεν καὶ διλογητέον πολλάκις" 
ἥδιον γάρ πως τὸ συντομώτερον ἢ σαφέστερον: ὡς γὰρ 
οἱ παρατρέχοντες παρορῶνται ἐνίοτε, οὕτως καὶ ἡ λέξις 
παρακούεται διὰ τὸ τάχος. 

198. Φεύγειν δὲ καὶ τὰς πλαγιότητας: καὶ γὰρ τοῦτο 
3 72 τῷ ε , 4 4 Ν 
ἀσαφές, ὥσπερ ἡ Φιλίστου λέξις. συντομώτερον δὲ πα- 


I otros P. 3,4 Kal ἐκ δὲ τὸ ἀπαθὲς in textu P, τρέφω πολλὴν...... 
συμβαλεῖς πάνυ in margine P. 4 συνεμβαλεῖς)] nos, συμβαλεῖς P: ἐμβαλεῖς 
Finckhius. 7 ἰὼν P. | ἀρπάζων P. 11 λοιπὴ: ue supra versum add. P. 
14 περὶ ἐπαναλήψεως titulus in P. 15 τί ἐστιν ἐπανάληψις in margine P. 
17 ἐπιφερομένον, wo supra ὃ scripto P. 18 χερόννησον P. 20 περιλείψω P. 
23 διλογιτέον P. 24 ἴδιον P. | ἢ σαφέστερον] edd., ὡς σαφέστερον P. 


28 ἀσαφῶς P. 


239” 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 161 


Thus disjointed, the words will of themselves force a man to 
be dramatic even in his own despite. But if you employ 
conjunctions and say ‘I received and bare and nurse, you 
will at the same time make the line quite lifeless. And what 
is unemotional is essentially undramatic. 

195. Other aspects of the actor’s art deserve attention. 
Take, for instance, the case of Ion in Euripides, who seizes 
his bow and threatens the swan which is letting fall its 
droppings upon the statues!. Many opportunities of move- 
ment are offered to the actor by Ion’s rush for his bow and 
arrows, by his face upturned to the sky as he addresses the 
swan, and by the rest of the detail contrived to aid the 
actor. Still, the subject of stage-craft is not at present 
before us. 

196. Clear writing should also shun ambiguities and make 
use of the figure termed ‘epanalepsis.’ ‘Epanalepsis’ is the 
repetition of the same particle in the course of a long-sustained 
outburst: eg. ‘all Philip’s achievements indeed—how he 
subjugated Thrace, and seized the Chersonese, and besieged 
Byzantium, and neglected to restore Amphipolis,—these 
things, indeed, I shall pass over’ It may be said that 
the repetition of the particle ‘indeed’ reminds us of the 
prelude and sets us again at the beginning of the sentence. 

197. For the sake of clearness the same thing must 
often be said twice over. There is somehow more charm 
than clearness in conciseness. For as men who race past us 
are sometimes indistinctly seen, so also the meaning of a 
sentence may, owing to its hurried movement, be only imper- 
fectly caught. 

198. The use of dependent cases must also be avoided, 
since this leads to obscurity, as Philistus’ style shows. A 


1 Eurip. 7022, 161 seqq. 
2B ΘΟΥΣ ΠΠΟΣῚ 


on 


Io 


20 


162 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡΙ EPMHNEIA 


ράδειγμα πλαγίας λέξεως καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀσαφοῦς τὸ 
παρὰ Ξενοφῶντι, οἷον ‘kal ὅτι τριήρεις ἤκουεν περι- 

4 - > > / 5 r 7 ,ὔὕ yy Ν 
πλεούσας amt ᾿Ιωνίας εἰς Κιλικίαν Τάμον EXOVTA τὰς 
Λακεδαιμονίων καὶ αὐτοῦ Κύρου. ᾿ τοῦτο γὰρ ἐξ εὐθείας 
Χ δέ he Ξ a ΄ ὃ la > ΄ 
μὲν ὧδέ πως λέγοιτο' “τριήρεις προσεδοκῶντο εἰς Κιλικίαν 
πολλαὶ μὲν Λάκαιναι, πολλαὶ δὲ Περσίδες, Κύρῳ ναυπη- 

“ San, > ~ ΄ὔ » ae) het) / 4 
γηθεῖσαι ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ τούτῳ. ἔπλεον δ᾽ am “lwvias: ναύαρχος 
> an 
δ᾽ αὐταῖς ἐπεστάτει Taos Αἰγύπτιος. μακρότερον μὲν 
οὕτως ἐγένετο ἴσως, σαφέστερον δέ. 

199. Καὶ ὅλως τῇ φυσικῇ τάξει τῶν ὀνομάτων 

΄ ε \ 6H (ὃ ΄ > a > ὃ ἕ 5 λέ 

χρηστέον, ὡς τὸ “᾿Εκπίδαμνός ἐστι πόλις ἐν δεξιᾷ ἐσπλέ- 
οντι εἰς τὸν ᾿Ιόνιον κόλπον" πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ὠνόμασται 
N \ a , Ν πο 9,5 Ψ , N \ 
TO περὶ ov, δεύτερον δὲ ὃ τοῦτό ἐστιν, OTL πόλις, καὶ τὰ 
ἄλλα ἐφεξῆς. 

200. Γίγνοιτο μὲν οὖν ἂν καὶ τὸ ἔμπαλιν, ὡς τὸ 
“Ἔστι πόλις ᾿Εφύρη. οὐ γὰρ πάντη ταύτην δοκιμάζομεν 
Ν 4 > \ Ν ε , 5 72 Ν 5 
τὴν τάξιν, οὐδὲ τὴν ἑτέραν ἀποδοκιμάζομεν, καθὰ ἐκ- 

4 , Ἂν Ν > la) ) 
τιθέμεθα μόνον τὸ φυσικὸν εἶδος τῆς τάξεως. 

201. “Ey δὲ τοῖς διηγήμασιν ἤτοι ἀπὸ τῆς ὀρθῆς 
5 ’ «? (ὃ / > NN ) “Ὁ 5 Ν ἴων > an 
ἀρκτέον, ‘ Emidapvos ἐστι πόλις, ἢ ἀπὸ τῆς αἰτιατικῆς, 
ὡς τὸ “λέγεται ᾿Επίδαμνον τὴν πόλιν. αἱ δὲ ἄλλαι 
πτώσεις ἀσάφειάν τινα παρέξουσι καὶ βάσανον τῷ τε 
λέγοντι αὐτῷ καὶ τῷ ἀκούοντι. 

“ Ν Ν 5 “ 3 , Ν 

202. Πειρᾶσθαι δὲ μὴ εἰς μῆκος ἐκτεινειν TAS περι- 
αγωγάς: “ὁ γὰρ ᾿Αχελῴος ῥέων ἐκ Πίνδου ὄρους ἄνωθεν 
μὲν παρὰ Στράτον πόλιν ἐπὶ θάλασσαν διέξεισιν: ἀλλ᾽ 
αὐτόθεν ἀπολήγειν καὶ ἀναπαύειν τὸν ἀκούοντα οὕτως" 
“ὃ yap Ayed@os ῥεῖ μὲν ἐκ Πίνδου ὄρους, ἔξεισιν δὲ εἰς 

ἵν ν “Δ ε 

θάλασσαν. πολὺ γὰρ οὕτως σαφέστερον, ὦσπερ ἂν at 


I, 2 τῶ παρὰ P. 3 σικελίαν P. | inter σικελίαν et τάμον litura maior in P. 


5 προσεδοκοῦντο P.  σικελίαν P. 6 λάκεναι P. 8 αὐτοῖς P. 9. οὗτος P. 
10 φυσικῇ] Victorius, φύσει καὶ Ῥ. 12 ἴώνιον P. [ὠνοσται, μα supra versum 
add. P. 13 ὃ τοῦ τὸ P. 16 παντὶ P. 20 πόλης P. 21 inter 


pw et ν rasura exigua in P. 22 ToTe P. 26 στρατὸν πάλιν P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 163 


short example of clearness sacrificed to dependent construc- 
tions is to be found in Xenophon: ‘He was informed that 
triremes belonging to the Lacedaemonians and to Cyrus 
himself were coasting round with Tamos on board from 
Ionia to Cilicia?’ This sentence might be written in a 
straightforward construction somewhat as follows: ‘In Cilicia 
there were expected many Lacedaemonian, and many 
Persian ships, the latter built for Cyrus with this very pur- 
pose. They were sailing from Ionia, and the admiral in 
command of them was the Egyptian Tamos.’ The sentence 
might thus have been longer: it would certainly have been 
clearer. 

199. In general, the natural order of the words should 
be followed, as in the sentence ‘Epidamnus is a town on 
your right hand as you sail into the Ionian gulf®’ First of all 
is mentioned the subject, which is then defined to be a town, 
and next come the other words in due succession. 

200. No doubt the order might be reversed, as in 
the words ‘There is a town Ephyra*’ We do not abso- 
lutely approve the one order nor condemn the other, when 
simply setting forth the natural method of arranging the 
words. 

201. In narrative passages we should begin with the 
nominative case, as in ‘Epidamnus (Eziéapvos) is a town’; 
or with the accusative, as in ‘it is said of the town of 
Epidamnus (Ἐπίδαμνον). The other cases will cause some 
obscurity and will put both speaker and hearer on tenter- 
hooks. 

202. An attempt must be made to keep the amplifica- 
tions within due bounds. Take this sentence: ‘For the 
Achelous flowing from Mount Pindus, near the inland city 
Stratus discharges itself into the sea*’ We ought to break off 
and give the hearer a rest thus: ‘For the Achelous flows from 
Mount Pindus, and discharges itself into the sea.’ This is far 
clearer than the other. It is with sentences as with roads. 


1 Xen. Anab. i. 2, 21. 2 Thucyd. i. 24. 
5. Hom: 72 viz 152. 4 Thucyd. ii. 102. Cp. ὃ 45 supra. 


10} 2 


164 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


πολλὰ σημεῖα ἔχουσαι ὁδοὶ Kal πολλὰς ἀναπαύλας: 
ἡγεμόσι γὰρ τὰ σημεῖα ἔοικεν, ἡ δὲ ἀσημείωτος καὶ 
μονοειδής, κἂν μικρὰ ἢ, ἄδηλος δοκεῖ. 
203. Περὶ μὲν δὴ σαφηνείας τοσαῦτα, ὡς ὀλίγα ἐκ 
5 πολλῶν, καὶ μάλιστα ἐν τοῖς ἰσχνοῖς αὐτῇ λόγοις χρηστέον. 
΄ Ν > ~ ΄ an lol 

204. Φεύγειν δὲ ἐν τῇ συνθέσει τοῦ χαρακτῆρος 

τούτου πρῶτον μὲν τὰ μήκη τῶν κώλων: μεγαλοπρεπὲς 

γὰρ πᾶν μῆκος, ὥσπερ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν | ἡρωϊκῶν | μέτρων τὸ 

ε 4 ε co Ν PN la} ε Ν ΄, Ν ζ 

ἑξάμετρον ἡρωϊκὸν [ὃν] καλεῖται ὑπὸ μεγέθους καὶ πρέ.- 

10 TOV ἥρωσιν, ἣ κωμῳδία δὲ συνέσταλται εἰς TO τρίμετρον 
ἢ νέα. . 

205. Τὰ πολλὰ οὖν κώλοις τριμέτροις χρησόμεθα 

Y 5 7 ΄ y ε \ , 2 ἢ ΄ 

καὶ ἐνίοτε κόμμασιν, ὥσπερ ὁ μὲν Πλάτων φησί, ‘ κατέ. 

Ν > “A Ν , ) Ν Ν ε 

βην χθὲς εἰς Πειραιᾶ μετὰ Γλαύκωνος: ᾿ πυκναὶ γὰρ αἱ 

ἢ NG) , > , Nera) ΄, ie) 

ἀνάπαυλαι καὶ ἀποθέσεις. Αἰσχίνης δὲ ‘ ἐκαθήμεθα μέν, 


- 
on 


ow, “ἐπὶ τῶν θάκων ἐν Λυκείῳ, ov ot ἀθλοθέται τὸν 
0 t 
ἀγῶνα διατιθέασιν." 
206. ᾿Εχέτω δὲ καὶ ἕδραν ἀσφαλῆ τῶν κώλων τὰ 
/ Ν ΄, ε Ν > 2 ε Ν Ν Ν 
τέλη καὶ βάσιν, ὡς τὰ εἰρημένα: αἱ γὰρ κατὰ τὰ 
20 τελευταῖα ἐκτάσεις μεγαλοπρεπεῖς, ὡς τὰ Θουκυδίδου, 
“Ayed@os ποταμὸς ῥέων ἐκ Πίνδου ὀρους᾽ καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. 
207. Φευκτέον οὖν καὶ τὰς τῶν μακρῶν στοιχείων 
λήξεις ἐν τῷ χαρακτῆρι τούτῳ καὶ τῶν διφθόγγων': 
συμπλήξεις ἐν τῷ χαρακτῆρι TOUTE ν διφθόγγ 
ὀγκηρὸν γὰρ πᾶσα ἔκτασις. καὶ εἴ που βραχέα συγ- 
κρουστέον | βραχέσιν, ὡς “ πάντα μὲν τὰ νέα καλά ἐστιν, 


τὸ 
σι 


Xv ΄ a ε G22 ; Ey ε “ ΄ Ν 
ἢ βραχέα μακροῖς, ὡς “ἠέλιος, ἢ ἁμῶς γέ πως διὰ 
βραχέων: καὶ ὅλως ἐμφαίνεται εὐκαταφρόνητος ὃ τοιοῦτος 
τρόπος τῆς λέξεως καὶ ἰδιωτικός, κἀπ᾽ αὐτὰ ταῦτα πεποιη- 


μένος. 


2 ἀσημείοτος Ρ. 8 ἡρωϊκῶν secl. Spengelius. 9 ὃν (e dittographia 
natum) seclusi. 10 %pwow]edd., ἡρώων P. 15 ἀναπαῦλαι ex ἀνάπαυλαι P. 
τό λυκίω Ῥ. 23 καὶ subter versum add. P. 26 ἠέλιος] Victorius, ἥλιος P. 
a&u@s] Finckhius, ἄλλως P. 27 βραχέως P. | ἐμφαίνεται] Victorius, éudal- 
νεσθαι P. 28 καὶ αὐτὰ P: κἀπ᾽ αὐτὰ dedi. 


240° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 165 


Some roads have many resting-places and many sign-posts ; 
and the sign-posts may be compared to guides. But a dreary 
road with never a sign-post seems hard to track, however 
short it may be. 

208. These are a few remarks, out of a possible many, 
on the subject of clearness. Clearness must be studied most 
of all in the plain style. 

204. Long members must be particularly avoided in 
composition of this type. Length always tends to eleva- 
tion. Thus, among metres, the hexameter is called ‘heroic’ 
owing to its amplitude which fits it for heroes. The New 
Comedy, on the other hand, is compressed into the tri- 
meter. 

205. Accordingly we shall for the most part employ 
trimeter members and sometimes phrases, as when Plato 
says: ‘I went down yesterday to the Peiraeus together with 
Glaucon’’ Here the rests and cadences are many. So with 
a sentence of Aeschines: ‘We sat upon the benches in the 
Lyceum, where the stewards of the games order the contests”. 

206. In the plain style the members should end with 
precision, and rest on a sure foundation, as in the examples 
just quoted. Prolonged endings belong rather to the elevated 
style, as in the words of Thucydides: ‘the river Achelous 
flowing from Mount Pindus, etc.®*’ 

207. In this style we must also shun the concurrence of 
long vowel-sounds and of diphthongs, since lengthening in- 
variably suggests elaboration. If concurrence be admitted, 
let it be of short letters with short (as in “πάντα μὲν τὰ 
νέα καλά éotiv’*); or of short with long (as in ‘the orb 
of day: ἠέλιος)᾽; or of short vowels in some shape or 
form. In general, this variety of style has little dignity or 
distinction, being in fact fashioned with that very end in 
view. 


1 Plat. Rep. i. τ init. 2 Aeschines Socr. fragm. 
3 Cp. 88 45, 202. + Cp. § 7o. 


166 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


208. Φευγέτω δὴ καὶ τὰ σημειώδη σχήματα: πᾶν 
γὰρ τὸ παράσημον ἀσύνηθες καὶ οὐκ ἰδιωτικόν. τὴν δὲ 
ἐνάργειαν καὶ τὸ πιθανὸν μάλιστα ὃ χαρακτὴρ οὗτος 
ἐπιδέξεται. περὶ ἐναργείας οὖν καὶ περὶ πιθανότητος 

5 λεκτέον. 

209. Πρῶτον δὲ περὶ ἐναργείας: γίνεται δ᾽ ἡ ἐνάργεια 

“Ὁ Ν 5 3 ’ὔ Ν A ’ὔ Ν 
πρῶτα μὲν ἐξ ἀκριβολογίας καὶ τοῦ παραλείπειν μηδὲν 

δ᾽ > / a ‘Cae δ᾽ 9 3 > \ 5 XN ) \ A 
μηδ ἐκτέμνειν, οἷον ‘as δ᾽ oT ἀνὴρ ὀχετηγὸς Kal πᾶσα 

ο Lal 
αὕτη ἢ παραβολή: τὸ yap ἐναργὲς ἔχει ἐκ τοῦ πάντα 
5 A Ν 7 Ν \ Lal 2 
το εἰρῆσθαι TA συμβαίνοντα, καὶ μὴ παραλελεῖφθαι μηδέν. 
ὉΠ 0 ΄΄ Nee aN ΄ 3 Ὁ 

210. Καὶ ἡ ἱπποδρομία δὲ ἡ ἐπὶ Πατρόκλῳ, ἐν οἷς 

λέγει, 
πνοιῇ δ᾽ Εὐμήλοιο μετάφρενον, 


\ 
KQU 


15 αἰεὶ yap δίφρου ἐπιβησομένοισιν ἐΐκτην. 

’ A 3 “A 3 5 las \ la) 
πάντα ταῦτα ἐναργῆ ἐστιν ἐκ τοῦ μηδὲν παραλελεῖφθαι 
τῶν τε συμβαινόντων καὶ συμβάντων. 

211. Ὥστε πολλάκις καὶ ἡ διλογία ἐνάργειαν ποιεῖ 

nan “ἡ Ν Ψ , ν ἊΝ ς Ν 3  Φ Ν 
μᾶλλον, ἢ τὸ ἁπαξ λέγειν, ὥσπερ τὸ ‘ov δ᾽ αὐτὸν καὶ 

20 ζῶντα ἔλεγες κακῶς, καὶ νῦν ἀποθανόντα γράφεις κακῶς. 
δὶς γὰρ κείμενον τὸ “ κακῶς᾽ ἐναργεστέραν σημαίνει τὴν 
βλασφημίαν. 

212. Ὅπερ δὲ τῷ Κτησίᾳ ἐγκαλοῦσιν ὡς ἀδολεσχο- 

/ Ν Ν / lal Ν » 3 la) 
τέρῳ διὰ Tas διλογίας, πολλαχῆ μὲν ἴσως ἐγκαλοῦσιν 

25 ὀρθῶς, πολλαχῆ δὲ οὐκ αἰσθάνονται τῆς ἐναργείας τοῦ 
3 / 7 ἊΝ > \ Ν Ν 4 wn ¥ 
ἀνδρός: τίθεται yap ταὐτὸ διὰ τὸ πολλάκις ποιεῖν ἔμφασιν 
πλείονα. 

a na Ν la 
213. Οἷα τὰ τοιάδε, “ Στρναγγαῖός τις, ἀνὴρ Μῆδος, 
γυναῖκα Σακίδα καταβαλὼν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἵππου: μάχονται 


:ογὰρ δὴ αἱ γυναῖκες ἐν Σάκαις ὥσπερ αἱ “Apaloves: 


3. οὗτος ex οὗτως P. 4 περιενάργει, compend. tamen indicato, P. 6 περὶ 
evapyelas titulus in P. 13 πνοιὴ P. 15. δίφρου Homerus: δίῴρω P. 
20 ἔλεγες : ες supra versum add. P. 23 on περὶ Κτησίου τί φησιν in 
margine P. 26 ποιεῖν ex ποιοῦν P. 28 Xrpvayyatos] Finckhius, 


Στρυάγλιος P. 30 odkes, ac supra ε scripto P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 167 


208. Peculiar figures should also be avoided, since all 
eccentricity is unfamiliar and extraordinary. As, however, 
the plain style will welcome vivid representation and per- 
suasiveness in an especial degree, we must next speak of 
these two qualities. 

209. We shall treat first of vividness, which arises from 
an exact narration overlooking no detail and cutting out 
nothing. An instance is the Homeric simile which begins ‘As 
when a man draws off water by a runnelt’ The comparison 
owes its vividness to the fact that all the accompanying cir- 
cumstances are mentioned and nothing is omitted. 

210. Another example is the horse-race in honour of 
Patroclus, as described by Homer :— 

For ever they seemed as though they would mount the chariot-floor 

Of Eumélus, and hot on his back did the breath of their nostrils pour, 

And his shoulders broad, for their heads overhung him as onward 
they flew’. 

The entire description is vivid owing to the fact that no 

detail which usually occurs and then occurred is omitted. 

211. From this it follows that repetition often gives the 
effect of vividness more than a single statement: e.g. ‘You 
are the man who, when he was alive, spoke to his discredit, 
and now that he is dead write to his discredit*’ The repeated 
use of the words ‘to his discredit’ adds to the vividness of 
the invective. 

212. The charge of garrulity often brought against 
Ctesias on the ground of his repetitions can perhaps in many 
passages be established, but in many instances it is his critics 
who fail to appreciate the writer’s vividness. The same word 
is repeated because this often makes a greater impression. 

213. Here isan example: “Stryangaeus, a Mede, having 
unhorsed a Sacian woman (for the women of the Sacae join 
in battle like Amazons), was struck with the youth and beauty 


1 Hom. 71. xxi. 257. 

* Hom. 71. xxiii. 379 
αἰεὶ yap δίφρου ἐπιβησομένοισιν ἐΐκτην, 
πνοιῇ δ᾽ Ἑὐμήλοιο μετάφρενον εὐρέε 7’ ὦμω 
θέρμετ᾽" ἐπ᾽ αὐτῷ γὰρ κεφαλὰς καταθέντε πετέσθην. 


3 Cp. 8 26. 


168 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


’ὔ δὴ Ν s 4 5 lel ἂν ε 4 An 
θεασάμενος δὴ τὴν Σακίδα εὐπρεπῆ Kal ὡραίαν μεθῆκεν 
ἀποσώζεσθαι. μετὰ δὲ τοῦτο σπονδῶν γενομένων, ἐρασ- 

Ἁ “~ ὩΝ 5 ,, > / \ 5 “.)Ἅ 5 
θεὶς τῆς γυναικὸς ἀπετύγχανεν: ἐδέδοκτο μὲν αὐτῷ ἀπο- 
A A “Ἁ Ν 
καρτερεῖν: γράφει δὲ πρότερον ἐπιστολὴν τῇ γυναικὶ 

΄ὔ ΄ 3 Ν Ν \ » Ν Ν Ν ὃ 3 

5 μεμφόμενος τοιάνδε: “Eya μὲν σὲ ἔσωσα, καὶ σὺ μὲν OL 
5 Ν 5 ’ὔ > Ν Ν Ν Ν 5» / ? 
ἐμὲ ἐσώθης: ἐγὼ δὲ διὰ σὲ ἀπωλόμην. 
214. Ἐνταῦθα ἐπιτιμήσειεν ἂν ἴσως τις βραχυλόγος 
SEY, ΩΝ Ψ Ν 5 ΄ Ν 5 Ν Ν 5 32 ᾽ Ν 
οἰόμενος εἶναι, ὅτι δὶς ἐτέθη πρὸς οὐδὲν τὸ “ἔσωσα᾽ καὶ 
«ὃ 3) 5..." 9 50 ) SEEN \ ΄, 3 ΄ aye 
L ἐμὲ ἐσώθης. ταὐτὸν yap σημαίνει ἀμφότερα. a 
> 5 ΄ὔ 72 ᾽ὔὕ Ν ἊΝ 5 4 Ν 
το εἰ ἀφέλοις θάτερον, συναφαιρήσεις καὶ τὴν ἐνάργειαν καὶ 
ἊΝ > lal > 4 / Ν Ἀ 5 , 4 Ν 
τὸ ἐκ τῆς ἐναργείας πάθος. καὶ τὸ ἐπιφερόμενον δέ, τὸ 
gD ΄ Dace ee J 9 ΄ A A 
aTwhounv ἀντὶ τοῦ ‘ ἀπόλλυμαι, ἐναργέστερον αὐτῃ) TH 

λ / 5 Tp Ν Ν δὴ Ν ὃ / le aN 

συντελείᾳ ἐστί: TO yap δὴ γεγονὸς δεινότερον τοῦ μέλ- 


“Ὁ ΄ » 
λοντος 7) γινομένου ετι. 


15 215. Kai ὅλως δὲ ὁ ποιητὴς οὗτος (ποιητὴν yap 
αὐτὸν καλοίη τις εἰκότως) ἐναργείας δημιουργός ἐστιν ἐν 
Lat ~ , 
TH γραφῇ συμπάσῃ. ; 


216. Οἷον καὶ ἐν τοῖς τοιοῖσδε: δεῖ τὰ γενόμενα οὐκ 

5 Ν ͵ Ψ > 4 3 Ν Ν / A 
εὐθὺς λέγειν, ὅτι ἐγένετο, ἀλλὰ κατὰ μικρόν, κρεμνῶντα 
"οτὸν ἀκροατὴν καὶ ἀναγκάζοντα συναγωνιᾶν. τοῦτο ὁ 
Κτησίας ἐν τῇ ἀγγελίᾳ τῇ περὶ Κύρου τεθνεῶτος ποιεῖ. 
ἐλθὼν γὰρ ὁ ἄγγελος οὐκ εὐθὺς λέγει ὅτι ἀπέθανεν Κῦρος 
παρὰ τὴν Παρυσάτιν: τοῦτο γὰρ ἡ λεγομένη ἀπὸ Σκυ- 
ἴω ww nw x Ψ nw 
θῶν ῥῆσίς ἐστιν: ἀλλὰ πρῶτον μὲν ἤγγειλεν, OTL νικᾷ, 
ε δὲ 4 θ Ἀ 59 ,ὔ 5 Ν δὲ ~ 3 (5. λ Ν 
25 ἢ δὲ ἥσθη καὶ ἠγωνίασεν: μετὰ | δὲ τοῦτο ἐρωτᾷ, βασιλεὺς 

δὲ a , ε \ ΄ ΄ NG) 0G a 
€ πῶς πράττει; ὃ δὲ πέφευγέ φησι: Kal 7 ὑπολαβοῦσα: 

΄ Ν 3 aA , τ \ / 3 

Τισσαφέρνης γὰρ αὐτῷ τούτων αἴτιος: καὶ πάλιν ἐπανε- 

wn lal an an 72 A 
poeta: Κῦρος δὲ ποῦ νῦν; ὁ δὲ ἄγγελος ἀμείβεται: ἔνθα 
Ν Ν 3 Ν + 5 ΄, Ἂν Ν Ν 
χρὴ τοὺς ἀγαθοὺς ἀνδρας αὐλίζεσθαι. κατὰ μικρὸν καὶ 

Ν Ν ΔΑΝ. / Ν Ν 4 > / 

30 κατὰ βραχὺ προϊὼν μόλις, τὸ δὴ λεγόμενον, ἀπέρρηξεν 

3 / / > la Ν 3 an 4 + > / 
αὐτό, μάλα ἠθικῶς Kal ἐναργῶς τόν τε ἄγγελον ἐμφήνας 
3 ἐδέδοκτω P. 9 inter τ et αὐτὸν litura in P: fuit fort. τὸ αὐτὸν. 


11 ἐκ τῆς supra versum add. P. tS γενόμενα] edd., γινόμενα P. 21 περὶ 
θανάτου Κύρου in margine P. 30 ἀπέρριξεν P. 


240" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 169 


of the Sacian and allowed her to escape. Afterwards, when 
peace was declared, he became enamoured of her and failed in 
his suit. He resolved to starve himself to death. But first he 
wrote a letter upbraiding the woman thus: ‘I saved you, ay 
you were saved through me; and now I have perished 
through youl” 

214. Here a critic who prided himself on his brevity 
might say that there is a useless repetition in ‘I saved you’ 
and ‘you were saved through me,’ the two statements con- 
veying the same idea. But if you take away one of the two, 
you will also take away the vividness and the emotional effect 
of vividness. Furthermore, the expression which follows (‘I 
have perished’ in place of ‘I perish’) is more vivid just 
because the past tense is used. There is something more 
impressive in the suggestion that all is over, than in the 
intimation that it is about to happen or is still happening. 

215. Altogether this poet (for a poet Ctesias may well 
be called) is an artist in vividness throughout his writings. 

216. Anexample may be added here. When a misfor- 
tune has happened, we should not state the fact at once, but 
unfold it gradually, thus keeping the reader in suspense and 
forcing him to share our distress. This is what Ctesias does 
in his narrative of the death of Cyrus. The messenger, out 
of consideration for Parysatis, does not immediately on his 
arrival announce that Cyrus is dead, for such a proceeding 
would be (to use the common expression) a brutal one. First 
of all he reports the victory of Cyrus. Parysatis is all joy 
and excitement. Then she asks, ‘And how fares the king?’ 
The reply is, ‘ He is fled.’ She rejoins: ‘Yes, he owes this to 
Tissaphernes.’ And she asks further, ‘But where is Cyrus 
now?’ The messenger replies, ‘In the bivouac of the brave.’ 
Thus warily does Ctesias advance little by little, step by step, 
till at last he ‘ breaks the news, as the phrase goes, and indicates 
very naturally and vividly the messenger’s reluctance to 


1 Ctesias, Fragmm. 20, 21 (Ctesiae Persica, ed. J. Gilmore). 


5 


Io 


15 


20 


170 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


J , lat 

ἀκουσίως ἀγγελοῦντα THY συμφοράν, Kal THY μητέρα εἰς 
5 / 5 ἊΝ Ν Ν 5 4 

ἀγωνίαν ἐμβαλὼν καὶ TOV ἀκούοντα. 

217. Τίνεται δὲ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ τὰ παρεπόμενα τοῖς 
΄ 4 > “) ae e 5 \ nw 5 ’ὔὕ 
πράγμασι λέγειν ἐνάργεια, οἷον ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ ἀγροίκου 
δί Ε Ψ « ΄7ὔ δ, ΕῚ a A 
βαδίζοντος ἔφη τις, ὅτι “πρόσωθεν ἤκουστο αὐτοῦ τῶν 
ποδῶν ὁ κτύπος προσιόντος, ὡς οὐδὲ βαδίζοντος, ἀλλ᾽ 

OL , Ν an 
οἷόν ye λακτίζοντος τὴν γῆν. 
218. Ὅπερ δὲ ὁ Πλάτων φησὶν ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἱπποκρά- 
Ca) / » “ Ν "ὃ ἊΝ ε 4 ’ὔὕ 
τους, " ἐρυθριάσας [ ἤδη τῇ νυκτὶ] ἤδη γὰρ ὑπέφηνέν τι 
ε ᾽ὔ 5 ς Lal 5 Ν 4 7 Ψ \ 5 / 
ἡμέρας, εἰς TO καταφανῆ αὐτὸν γενέσθαι, ὅτι μὲν ἐναργέ- 
,ὔ 3 A nA ΘΟ > 5 4 4 5 lal 
στατόν ἐστι, παντὶ δῆλον: ἡ δ᾽ ἐνάργεια γέγονεν ἐκ τῆς 
φροντίδος τῆς περὶ τὸν λόγον καὶ τοῦ ἀπομνημονεῦσαι, 
ν 4 ΩΝ 5 ἊΣ 5 Lay ε ε 72 
ὅτι νύκτωρ πρὸς αὐτὸν εἰσῆλθεν ὁ ᾿Ἱπποκράτης. 
219. Κακοφωνία δὲ πολλάκις, ὡς TO ᾿κόπτ᾽, ἐκ δ᾽ 
ἐγκέφαλος, καὶ “ πολλὰ δ᾽ ἄναντα, κάταντα"᾽ μεμίμηται 
Ν “A 7 Ν > 4, ἴω \ , 
yap τῇ κακοφωνίᾳ τὴν ἀνωμαλίαν: πᾶσα δὲ μίμησις 
ἐναργές τι ἔχει. 
220. Καὶ τὰ πεποιημένα δὲ ὀνόματα ἐνάργειαν ποιεῖ 
ὃ Ν Ν Ν ΄ 5 ΄,ὕ oy, Ν ὦ ΄ bd 
ιὰ TO κατὰ μίμησιν ἐξενηνέχθαι, ὥσπερ τὸ “λάπτοντες. 
εἰ δὲ “πίνοντες εἶπεν, OUT ἐμιμεῖτο πίνοντας τοὺς κύνας, 
» 9 9 » > 7 \ Noes , ἢ ν 
οὔτε ἐνάργεια ἂν τις ἐγίνετο. καὶ τὸ “γλώσσῃσι᾽ δὲ 
τῷ λάπτοντες προσκείμενον ἔτι ἐναργέστερον ποιεῖ τὸν 
λό Ἂν \ 95 72 Ν ε > 4 > lal = 
Oyov. καὶ περὶ ἐναργείας μὲν ὡς ἐν τύπῳ εἰπεῖν TOT 
auTa. 
221. Τὸ πιθανὸν δὲ ἐν δυοῖν, ἐν τε τῷ σαφεῖ Kal 


συνήθει: τὸ γὰρ ἀσαφὲς καὶ ἀσύνηθες ἀπίθανον: λέξιν 


2 ἐμβαλῶν Ρ. 9 ἤδη τῇ νυκτὶ seclusit Schneiderus. 10 εἰς τὸ Ρ: 
ὥστε Plat. [4 κακοφωνία: a supra versum scripsit P. κόπτεν δ᾽ P. 
16 ἀνωμαλίαν ex ἀνομαλίαν Ῥ. IQ λάκπτοντες Ρ. 20 ἐμιμήτο Ρ. 
22 τὸ λάχκπτοντες P. 25 περὶ πιθανότητος in margine P. 26 ἀσύνηθες ex 


ἀσύνεθες m. rec. P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 171 


announce the calamity, while he himself causes the reader to 
join in the mother’s grief'. 

21'7. Vividness may also be produced by mentioning 
the accompanying circumstances of any action. It was, for 
instance, once said of a countryman’s walk that ‘the noise of 
his feet had been heard from afar as he approached?, the 
suggestion being that he was not walking at all, but stamping 
the ground, so to say. 

218. Plato also provides an example when referring to 
Hippocrates : ‘ He was blushing, for the first glimmer of dawn 
now came to betray him*’ The extreme vividness of this 
description is clear to everybody. It is the result of the care 
shown in the narrative, which brings to mind the fact that it 
was night when Hippocrates visited Socrates. 

219. Cacophony is often vivid, as in the lines :— 


And together laid hold on twain, and dashed them against the ground 

Like whelps: down gushed the brain, and bespattered the rock- 
flour round’. 

Or, 

And upward and downward and thwartward and slantward they 
tramped evermore’. 


Homer intends the cacophony to suggest the broken ground, 
all imitation having an element of vividness. 

220. Onomatopoeic words produce a vivid effect, be- 
cause their formation is imitative. The participle ‘lapping’ 
is an instance in point’. If Homer had said ‘drinking,’ he 
would not have imitated the sound of dogs drinking, nor 
would there have been any vividness. The word ‘tongues’ 
(γλώσσησι) added to the word ‘lapping’ makes the narrative 
still more vivid—But on the subject of vividness this outline 
sketch must suffice. 

221. The power of convincing depends on two things, 
lucidity and naturalness. In other words, what is not lucid 


1 Ctesias, Fragm. 36 (ed. Gilmore). 25 Scraeine: 3 Plat. Protag. 312 A. 
4 Hom. Odyss. ix. 289 
σὺν δὲ δύω μάρψας ws τε σκύλακας ποτὶ γαίῃ 
κόπτ᾽᾽ ἐκ δ᾽ ἐγκέφαλος χαμάδις ῥέε, dete δὲ γαῖαν. 
5 Hom. 71. xxiii. 116 
πολλὰ δ᾽ ἄναντα κάταντα πάραντά Te δόχμιά τ᾽ ἦλθον. 
6 Hom. 7... xvi. 161 
λάψοντες γλώσσησιν ἀραιῆσιν μέλαν ὕδωρ. 


or 


10 


30 


172 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


TE οὖν οὐ THY περιττὴν οὐδὲ UTE ον ὃ ον ἐν τῇ 
ἢ ριττὴ πέρογκον διωκτέον ἐν τῇ 
id Ν ε 4 4 A \ \ 
πιθανότητι, καὶ ὡσαύτως σύνθεσιν βεβαιοῦσαν καὶ μηδὲν 
ἔχουσαν ῥυθμοειδές. 
222. Ἂν τούτοις τε οὖν τὸ πιθανόν, καὶ ἐν ᾧ Θεό- 
4 7 > ΄ 5 Ε] 3 ᾿ ’, “ 
φραστός φησιν, ὅτι οὐ πάντα ἐπ᾽ ἀκριβείας δεῖ μακρη- 
γορεῖν, ἀλλ᾽ ἔνια καταλιπεῖν καὶ τῷ ἀκροατῇ συνιέναι, 
A \ 
καὶ λογίζεσθαι ἐξ αὑτοῦ: συνεὶς yap τὸ ἐλλειφθὲν ὑπὸ 
σοῦ οὐκ ἀκροατὴς μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ μάρτυς σου γίνεται, 
: Ἀ 
καὶ ἅμα εὐμενέστερος. συνετὸς γὰρ ἑαυτῷ δοκεῖ διὰ 
σὲ τὸν ἀφορμὴν παρεσχηκότα αὐτῷ τοῦ συνιέναι, τὸ 
δὲ πάντα ὡς ἀνοήτῳ λέγειν καταγινώσκοντι ἔοικεν τοῦ 
ἀκροατοῦ. 
223. “Emel δὲ καὶ ὁ ἐπιστολικὸς χαρακτὴρ δεῖται 
3 ΄ Ν Ν 3 a ΄, > / Ν > 
ἰσχνότητος, καὶ περὶ αὐτοῦ λέξομεν. ᾿Αρτέμων μὲν οὖν 
ε Ν 3 / 3 ᾽ὔ > 4 ν la) 
ὁ τὰς ᾿Αριστοτέλους ἀναγράψας ἐπιστολάς φησιν, ὅτι δεῖ 
3 ΝΝ 3 an / ὃ aN ΄ ΄ὔ Ν > Xr ene 
ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ τρόπῳ διάλογόν τε γράφειν καὶ ἐπιστολάς 
εἶναι γὰρ τὴν ἐπιστολὴν οἷον τὸ ἕτερον μέρος τοῦ δια- 
λόγου. 
» ς A 
224. Kal λέγει μέν τι tows, ov μὴν ἅπαν: det yap 
ὑποκατεσκευάσθαι πως μᾶλλον τοῦ διαλόγου τὴν ἐπιστο- 
λήν: ὁ μὲν γὰρ μιμεῖται αὐτοσχεδιάζοντα, ἡ δὲ γράφεται 
καὶ δώρον πέμπεται τρόπον τινά. 
225. Τίς γοῦν οὕτως ἂν διαλεχθείη πρὸς φίλον, 
ν εἰ vA \ > / ε Ν “ ΄, 
ὥσπερ ὃ ᾿Αριστοτέλης πρὸς ᾿Αντίπατρον ὑπὲρ τοῦ φυγάδος 


5 γράφων τοῦ γέροντός φησιν" ‘ei δὲ πρὸς ἁπάσας οἴχεται 


γᾶς φυγὰς οὗτος, ὥστε μὴ κατάγειν, δῆλον ὡς τοῖσγε Els 

"Avdov κατελθεῖν βουλομένοις οὐδεὶς φθόνος: ᾿ 6 ya 
μ 

ν ’, 3 4 » ἊΝ 3 

οὕτως διαλεγόμενος ἐπιδεικνυμένῳ ἔοικεν μᾶλλον, οὐ 


λαλοῦντι. 


226. Καὶ λύσεις συχναὶ ὁποῖαι * * ob πρέπουσιν 


7 é&aurod P. 13. πῶς δεῖ ἐπιστέλλειν titulus in P, eadem verba in 
margine P. [3,14 ὁ et μὲν supra versum add. P. 20 ὑποκατασκευᾶσθαί P. 
23 διαλεχθείη] Schneiderus, διαλεχθῆ P. 26 yas] Valckenaerius, τὰς P. | 
κατάγειν ex καταγῆν P. 28 ἐπιδεικνυμένω ex ἐπιδεικνομένω P, 30 συχναὶ] 
Victorius, ἰσχναὶ P. | lacunam statuit Goellerus. 


241" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 173 


nor natural is not convincing. Accordingly exuberant and 
inflated language must not be sought after in a style meant 
to carry conviction. The composition, likewise, in such a 
style, must be steady-going and void of formal rhythm. 

222. These, then, are the main essentials of persuasive- 
ness; to which may be added that indicated by Theophrastus 
when he says that all possible points should not be punctili- 
ously and tediously elaborated, but some should be left to the 
comprehension and inference of the hearer’, who when he 
perceives what you have omitted becomes not only your 
hearer but your witness, and a very friendly witness too. 
For he thinks himself intelligent because you have afforded 
him the means of showing his intelligence. It seems like a 
slur on your hearer to tell him everything as though he were 
a simpleton. 

223. Wewill next treat of the epistolary style, since it 
too should be plain. Artemon, the editor of Aristotle’s 
Letters, says that a letter ought to be written in the same 
manner as a dialogue, a letter being regarded by him as one 
of the two sides of a dialogue?. 

224. There is perhaps some truth in what he says, but 
not the whole truth. The letter should be a little more studied 
than the dialogue, since the latter reproduces an extemporary 
utterance, while the former is committed to writing and is (in 
a way) sent as a gift. 

225. Who (one may ask) would, in conversation with a 
friend, so express himself as does Aristotle when writing to 
Antipater on the subject of the aged exile? ‘If he is doomed 
to wander to the uttermost parts of the earth, an exile 
hopeless of return, it is clear that we cannot blame such men 
should they wish to descend to Hades’ hall*’ A man who 
conversed in that fashion would seem not to be talking but to 
be making a display. 

226. Frequent breaks in a sentence such as............... 
are not appropriate in letters. Such breaks cause obscurity in 


1 Theophrastus περὶ λέξεως. 5 Ὁ. π. 3 ἰηἴα. 
3 Aristot. Fragm. 615 (ed. Berol. v. pp. 1581, 1582). 


174 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


> “ἊΝ > Ν Ν la 

ἐπιστολαῖς: ἀσαφὲς yap ἐν γραφῇ ἡ λύσις, Kal TO μι- 
Ν 5 »“"). A lal lal Ὁ 

μητικὸν οὐ γραφῆς οὕτως οἰκεῖον, ὡς ἀγῶνος, οἷον ὡς ἐν 

la > ΄ ΄ > > ΄ ὯΝ Ν 

τῷ Εὐθυδήμῳ: “τίς ἦν, ὦ Σώκρατες, ᾧ χθὲς ἐν Λυκείῳ 
΄ > \ Q im ” 

διελέγου ; ἢ πολὺς ὑμᾶς ὄχλος περιειστήκει" ᾿ Kal μικρὸν 


\ > / > ΄ 5 a 
προελθὼν ἐπιφέρει, ‘aha μοι E€vos Tis φαίνεται εἶναι, @ 


σι 


΄ ΄ὔ s ᾽ ε Ν a 
διελέγου: τίς ἣν; ἢ yap τοιαύτη πᾶσα ἑρμηνεία καὶ 
/ ε ~ nw 
μίμησις ὑποκριτῇ πρέποι μᾶλλον, ov γραφομέναις ἐπι- 
στολαῖς. 
227. Πλεῖστον δὲ ἐχέτω τὸ ἠθικὸν ἡ ἐπιστολή, 
ν Ν ε ὃ ia Ν Ν 3 / 4 A 
10 ὥσπερ καὶ ὃ διάλογος: σχεδὸν yap εἰκόνα ἕκαστος τῆς 
Lay la) 4 3, 
ἑαυτοῦ ψυχῆς γράφει τὴν ἐπιστολήν. καὶ ἔστι μὲν καὶ 
» An > an 
ἐξ ἄλλου λόγου παντὸς ἰδεῖν τὸ ἦθος τοῦ γράφοντος, ἐξ 
οὐδενὸς δὲ οὕτως, ὡς ἐπιστολῆς. 
228. Τὸ δὲ μέγεθος συνεστάλθω τῆς ἐπιστολῆς, 
ν Ν ε / ες Ν A , Ν 4 
ὥσπερ καὶ ἡ λέξις. αἱ δὲ ἄγαν μακραί, καὶ προσέτι 


- 
σι 


Ν \ ε ΄ 3 δέ 5 Ν Ν 5 4 
κατὰ τὴν ἑρμηνείαν ὀγκωδέστεραι, ov μὰ THY ἀλήθειαν 
ἐπιστολαὶ γένοιντο ἄν, ἀλλὰ συγγράμματα, τὸ χαίρειν 
ἔχοντα προσγεγραμμένον, καθάπερ τοῦ Πλάτωνος πολλαὶ 
καὶ ἡ Θουκυδίδου. 

ἘΞ 229. Καὶ τῇ συντάξει μέντοι λελύσθω paddov: 

“ Ν ὃ 72 ν 5 5 “4 > A 
γελοῖον γὰρ περιοδεύειν, ὥσπερ οὐκ ἐπιστολὴν, ἀλλὰ 
δίκην γράφοντα: καὶ οὐδὲ γελοῖον μόνον, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ 
φιλικὸν (τὸ γὰρ δὴ κατὰ τὴν παροιμίαν “τὰ σῦκα σῦκα᾽ 
λεγόμενον) ἐπιστολαῖς ταῦτα ἐπιτηδεύειν. 

28 230. Εἰδέναι δὲ χρή, ὅτι οὐχ ἑρμηνεία μόνον, ἀλλὰ 
καὶ πράγματά τινα ἐπιστολικά ἐστιν. ᾿Αριστοτέλης γοῦν 
ὃς μάλιστα ἐπιτετευχέναι δοκεῖ τοῦ [αὐτοῦ] ἐπιστολικοῦ, 
‘ “ Ν ΕῚ 4 ip $) 2 « 5 Ν > > 

τοῦτο δὲ οὐ γράφω aol, φησίν: “οὐ yap Hv ἐπιστο- 
λικόν.᾽ 

50 231. Εἰ yap τις ἐν ἐπιστολῇ σοφίσματα γράφοι καὶ 


1 ἀσαφὲς : ες σι ρτα versum add. P. 3 λυκίωῬΡ. 4 ἡμᾶς P. 112 πάντως Ρ. 
18 τοῦ Πλάτωνος πολλαὶ] Finckhius, τὰ Πλάτωνος πολλά P. 20 τάξει, τῇ 
σὺν supra versum scripsit m. rec. P.  λελύσθω: ν in rasura P. 23 Taov 
(κασύ : his litteris extra versum additis) κα P. 27 ὃς] Spengelius, ws P. | seclu- 


dendum, ut videtur, αὐτοῦ. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 175 


writing, and the gift of imitating conversation is a better aid 
to debate than to writing. Consider the opening of the 
Euthydemus: ‘Who was it, Socrates, with whom you were 
conversing yesterday in the Lyceum? Quite a large crowd 
was surrounding your party’. And a little further on Plato 
adds: ‘Nay, he seems to me to be some stranger, the man 
with whom you were conversing. Who was he, pray ??’ All 
such imitative style better suits an actor; it does not suit 
written letters. 

227. The letter, like the dialogue, should abound in 
glimpses of character. It may be said that everybody reveals 
his own soul in his letters. In every other form of composition 
it is possible to discern the writer’s character, but in none so 
clearly as in the epistolary. 

228. The length of a letter, no less than its style, must 
be carefully regulated. Those that are too long, and further 
are rather stilted in expression, are not in sober truth letters 
but treatises with the heading ‘My dear So-and-So.’ This is 
true of many of Plato’s, and of that of Thucydides. 

229. There should be a certain degree of freedom in the 
structure of a letter. It is absurd to build up periods, as if 
you were writing not a letter but a speech for the law-courts. 
And such laboured letter-writing is not merely absurd; it 
does not even obey the laws of friendship, which demand 
that we should ‘call a spade a spade, as the proverb has it. 

230. We must also remember that there are epistolary 
topics, as well as an epistolary style. Aristotle, who is 
thought to have been exceptionally successful in attaining 
the epistolary manner, says: ‘I have not written to you on 
this subject, since it was not fitted for a letter®.’ 

231. If anybody should write of logical subtleties or 


1 Plat. Huthyd. 271 A. 
2 Plat. Huthyd. 270A. 
8 Aristot. Fragm. 620 (ed. Berol.). 


Io 


= 
tn 


20 


iS) 
on 


30 


176 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


, 4 4 
φυσιολογίας, γράφει μέν, οὐ μὴν ἐπιστολὴν γράφει. φι- 
, ΄ 5S 
λοφρόνησις yap τις βούλεται εἶναι ἡ ἐπιστολὴ σύντομος, 

Ν Ν la 
Kal περὶ ἁπλοῦ πράγματος ἔκθεσις καὶ ἐν ὀνόμασιν 
ἁπλοῖς. 

232. Κάλλος μέντοι αὐτῆς αἵ τε φιλικαὶ φιλοφρο- 
νήσεις καὶ πυκναὶ παροιμίαι ἐνοῦσαι: καὶ τοῦτο γὰρ 

/ 5 ΄ 5 »“ / , 4 vA 5 : 
μόνον ἐνέστω αὐτῇ σοφόν, διότι δημοτικόν τί ἐστιν ἡ 
παροιμία καὶ κοινόν, ὁ δὲ γνωμολογῶν καὶ προτρεπόμενος 

5 > 3 ia A “ ὃ, 5 ἊΝ “.): 
οὐ Ou ἐπιστολῆς ἔτι λαλοῦντι ἔοικεν, ἀλλὰ μηχανῆς. 

3 ΄ ΄ Ν } / tp ~ 

233. Ἀριστοτέλης μέντοι και ἀποδείξεσί που KPYTAL 
9 a - ,ὕ ΄ “ ε , \ 
ἐπιστολικῶς, οἷον διδάξαι βουλόμενος, ὅτι ὁμοίως χρὴ 
εὐεργετεῖν τὰς μεγάλας πόλεις καὶ τὰς μικράς, φησίν, 
«- ε Ν Ν 5 5 , » ν 3 5 Ν ε ,ὔ 
οἱ γὰρ θεοὶ ἐν ἀμφοτέραις ἴσοι, ὥστ᾽ ἐπεὶ αἱ χάριτες 
θεαί, ἴσαι ἀποκείσονταί σου παρ᾽ ἀμφοτέραις. καὶ γὰρ 
ἊΝ 9) 4 5 ~ 5 Ἂς δ ε > 4 
TO ἀποδεικνύμενον αὐτῷ ἐπιστολικὸν Kal ἡ ἀπόδειξις 
αὐτή. 

234. Ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ πόλεσίν ποτε καὶ βασιλεῦσιν 
γράφομεν, ἔστωσαν τοιαῦται [αἱ] ἐπιστολαὶ μικρὸν 
ἐξηρμέναι πως. στοχαστέον γὰρ καὶ τοῦ προσώπου 
ὩΣ , i 5 ΄ ,ὕ Ν 3 ν vA 
ᾧ γράφεται: ἐξηρμένη μέντοι [καὶ] οὐχ ὥστε σύγ- 
γραμμα εἶναι ἀντ᾽ ἐπιστολῆς, ὥσπερ αἱ ᾿Αριστοτέλους 

Ν 3 ͵΄ \ A ἊΣ , 3) 4 ε 
πρὸς ᾿Αλέξανδρον, καὶ πρὸς τοὺς Δίωνος οἰκείους 7 
Πλάτωνος. 

δὰ 
235. Καθόλου δὲ μεμίχθω ἡ ἐπιστολὴ κατὰ τὴν 
nw ἴω , 

ἑρμηνείαν ἐκ δυοῖν χαρακτήροιν τούτοιν, τοῦ TE χαρίεντος 

nw Lat ~ wr Ν 

καὶ τοῦ ἰσχνοῦ. καὶ περὶ ἐπιστολῆς μὲν τοσαῦτα, καὶ 
ἅμα περὶ τοῦ χαρακτῆρος τοῦ ἰσχνοῦ. 

’ὔ Ν ἊΣ “ 5 na , 

236. Tapakeirar δὲ καὶ τῳ ἰσχνῳ διημαρτημένος 

ἵν a 
χαρακτήρ, ὁ ξηρὸς καλούμενος. γίνεται δὲ καὶ οὗτος ἐν 

’ὔ 9 4 ΄ Ψ SEN: om 7 y ν 
τρισίν: ἐν διανοίᾳ μέν, ὥσπερ τις ἐπὶ Ξέρξου ἔφη, ὅτι 
¢ , Q 70 \ , aA € ww) oN 
κατέβαινεν ὃ Ξέρξης peta πάντων τῶν ἑαυτοῦ. para 

2 επιστοὶ P. 6 ἐνοῦσαι : οὖσαι supra versum scripsit P. 8 γνομω- 


λογῶν P. 18 αἱ 560]. Spengelius. 20 καὶ del. Goellerus. 28 περὶ 
ξηροῦ in margine P. 


241" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 177 


questions of natural history in a letter, he writes indeed, but 
not a letter. A letter is designed to be the heart’s good 
wishes in brief; it is the exposition of a simple subject in 
simple terms. 

232. Its beauty consists in the expressions of friendship 
and the many proverbs which it contains. This last is the 
only philosophy admissible in it, the proverb being common 
property and popular in character. But the man who 
utters sententious maxims and exhortations seems to be no 
longer talking familiarly in a letter but to be speaking ‘ex 
cathedra.’ 

933. Aristotle, however, sometimes uses certain forms 
of demonstration fitly in a letter. For instance, wishing to 
show that large towns and small have an equal claim to be 
well treated, he says: ‘The gods are as great in one as in 
the other ; and since the Graces are gods, they will be placed 
by you in one no less than in the other’’ The point he 
wishes to prove is fitted for a letter, and so is the proof itself. 

234. Since occasionally we write to States or royal 
personages, such letters must be composed in a slightly 
heightened tone. It is right to have regard to the person to 
whom the letter is addressed. The heightening should not, 
however, be carried so far that we have a treatise in place of a 
letter, as is the case with those of Aristotle to Alexander and 
with that of Plato to Dion’s friends. 

235. In. general it may be remarked that, from the 
point of view of expression, the letter should be a com- 
pound of two styles, viz. the graceful and the plain.—So 
much with regard to letter-writing and the plain style. 

236. Side by side with the plain style is found a de- 
fective counterpart, the so-called ‘arid’ style. This, again, 
has three sources, the first of which is the thought, as when 
someone says of Xerxes that ‘he was coming down to the coast 


1 Aristot. Hragm. 609 (ed. Berol.). 


178 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


yap ἐσμίκρυνεν TO πρᾶγμα, ἀντὶ τοῦ ‘pera τῆς ᾿Ασίας 
ἁπάσης εἰπεῖν “μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἑαυτοῦ φήσας. 
Ν ἵν “ 

237. Ilepu δὲ τὴν λέξιν γίνεται τὸ ξηρόν, ὅταν πραγμα 
μέγα σμικροῖς ὀνόμασιν ἀπαγγέλλῃ, οἷον ὡς ὁ Γαδαρεὺς 
5 Ν “ 5 lol ͵ὕ , \ wn ͵7 

5 ἐπὶ τῆς ἐν Σαλαμῖνι ναυμαχίας φησί: καὶ τοῦ Φαλάριδος 
a , x 7 \ ε , Se A 
τοῦ τυράννου ἔφη τις, ‘aTTa yap ὁ Φάλαρις ἠνώχλει Tots 
᾿Ακραγαντίνοις. ναυμαχίαν γὰρ τοσαύτην καὶ τυράννων 
5 72 5 Ν Le) « A 2 5 ,ὔ 5 Ν lal © > 4 ᾽ 
ὠμότητα οὐχὶ τῷ “ἀττα᾽ ὀνόματι οὐδὲ τῷ “ἠνώχλει 
5 “ / 5 > 5 7 \ Ue Lal ε 
ἐχρὴν λέγειν, ahd ἐν μεγάλοις καὶ πρέπουσιν τῳ ὕποκει- 
το μένῳ πράγματι. 

238. Ἔν δὲ συνθέσει γίνεται τὸ ξηρόν, ἤτοι ὅταν 
πυκνὰ ἢ τὰ κόμματα, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς ᾿Αφορισμοῖς ἔχει: 
ς ε 4 4 ε ἊΝ 4 7 ε A Ν 5 ᾽ὔ 
ὁ βίος βραχύς, ἡ δὲ τέχνη μακρά, ὁ δὲ καιρὸς ὀξύς, 
ε \ A BD, & O 2 , , 3 
ἡ δὲ πεῖρα σφαλερά᾽ 7 ὅταν ἐν μεγάλῳ πράγματι ἀπο- 

15 κεκομμένον ἢ τὸ κῶλον καὶ μὴ ἔκπλεων, ὥσπερ τις 
3 4 an ν 5 5 , -) Ν 5 
Ἀριστείδου κατηγορῶν, ὅτι οὐκ ἀφίκετο εἰς τὴν ἐν Σαλα- 

A ΄ g 2 \ -. > » εὖ ε \ 
μῖνι ναυμαχίαν, “ἀλλὰ αὐτόκλητος, ἔφη, “ὅτι ἢ μὲν 
2 Ss Ν 7, > ΄ὔ ἈΝ τ ὁ) 
Δημήτηρ ἦλθεν καὶ συνεναυμάχει, Ἀριστείδης δὲ οὔ. 
ἡ γὰρ ἀποκοπὴ καὶ ἀπρεπὴς καὶ ἄκαιρος. ταῖς μὲν 

20 τοιαύταις ἀποκοπαῖς ἐν ἑτέροις χρηστέον. 

239. Πολλάκις μέντοι τὸ μὲν διανόημα αὐτὸ ψυχρόν 

’ὔὕ 5 Ν ε lal > 4 ,ὔ ε 4 
τί ἐστι, Kal ws νῦν ὀνομάζομεν κακόζηλον, ἡ σύνθεσις 
δ᾽ ἀποκεκομμένη καὶ κλέπτουσα τοῦ διανοήματος τὴν 
ἄδειαν, ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τοῦ νεκρᾷ τῇ γυναικὶ μιχθέντος ἔφη 
> an ἊΝ 

25 τις, OTL “οὐ μίγνυται αὖ τῇ ἀνθρώπῳ" τὸ μὲν γὰρ δια- 
νόημα καὶ τυφλῷ δῆλόν φασιν, ἡ σύνθεσις δὲ συσταλεῖσα 
κλέπτει μέν πως τὴν ἄδειαν τοῦ πράγματος, ποιεῖ δὲ τὴν 
νῦν ὄνομα ἔχουσαν ξηροκακοζηλίαν συγκειμένην ἐκ δυοῖν 
κακῶν, ἐκ μὲν τῆς κακοζηλίας διὰ τὸ πρᾶγμα, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ 


30 ξηροῦ διὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν. 


I ἢ μετὰ Ρ. 2 τῶν add. edd. 3 πράγμα Ρ. 4 ἀπαγγέλη Ρ. | Ta- 
δαρεὺς] edd., Tadnpeds P. 6 ἠνόχλει P. τυράννων, ov supra versum 
scripto, P. 8 ἠνόχλει P. 14, 15 ἀποκεκομμένω ἣ τῶ κῶλω Ρ. 18 συνεναυ- 


μάχει ex συνεναυμάχη P. 25 αὖ τῇ ἀνθρώπῳ conicio: αὐτῆς ἄν P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 179 


with all his following’ He has quite belittled the event by 
saying ‘with all his following’ in place of ‘with the whole of 
Asia.’ 

237. In expression aridity is found when a writer 
describes a great event in terms as trivial as those applied 
by the Gadarene to the battle of Salamis. And someone 
said of the despot Phalaris that ‘Phalaris inflicted certain 
annoyances on the people of Acragas!. So momentous a 
sea-fight and so cruel a despot ought not to have been 
described by the word ‘certain’ nor by the word ‘annoyances, 
but in impressive terms appropriate to the subject. 

238. Aridity may also be due to composition. This is 
so when the detached clauses are many, as in the Aphorisms : 
‘Life is short, art long, opportunity fleeting, experience de- 
ceptive’ It is so, again, when in dealing with an important 
matter, the member is broken and not completed. Someone, 
for example, when accusing Aristeides for not being present 
at the battle of Salamis, said: ‘Why, Demeter came un- 
bidden and fought on our side; but Aristeides, no’ Here 
the abrupt ending is inappropriate and ill-timed. Abrupt 
endings of this kind should be reserved for other occasions. 

239. Often the thought is in itself frigid, or what we 
now term ‘tasteless,’ while the composition is abrupt and 
tries to disguise the licence of the thought. Someone says 
of a man who embraced his wife when dead: ‘he does not 
embrace the creature again”. The meaning even a blind man 
can see, as the saying goes; but the compression of the 
phrasing hides to some extent the licence of the thing, and 
produces what is now called by the name of ‘tasteless 
aridity, being made up of two defects, tastelessness of 


subject-matter and aridity of style. 


1 Ser. Inc. 2 Hippocr. Aphor.: cp. ὃ 4 supra. 
12—2 


σι 


Io 


20 


25 


180 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


Wo 


240. Καὶ ta περὶ τῆς δεινότητος δὲ δῆλα ἂν εἴη 
λοιπὸν ἐκ τῶν προειρημένων, ὅτι καὶ αὐτὴ γένοιτ᾽ ἂν ἐν 
τρισίν, ἐν οἷσπερ οἱ πρὸ αὐτῆς χαρακτῆρες: καὶ γὰρ 
πράγματά τινα ἐξ ἑαυτῶν ἐστι δεινά, ὥστε τοὺς λέγοντας 

5 Ν Ν ~ x Ν A 4 4 
αὐτὰ δεινοὺς δοκεῖν, Kav μὴ δεινῶς λέγωσιν, καθάπερ 
ὁ Θεόπομπος τὰς ἐν τῷ Πειραιεῖ αὐλητρίας καὶ τὰ πορνεῖα 
καὶ τοὺς αὐλοῦντας καὶ adovTas καὶ ὀρχουμένους, ταῦτα 
πάντα δεινὰ ὀνόματα ὄντα καίτοι ἀσθενῶς εἰπὼν δεινὸς 
δοκεῖ. 

N \ \ ΄ ε \ - , 3 

241. Κατα δὲ THV σύνθεσιν ὃ XAPAKTYP οὗτος γινοιτ 
ἂν πρῶτον μὲν εἰ κόμματα ἔχοι ἀντὶ κώλων: τὸ γὰρ 

lol ΕἸ , Ν ὃ ,ὔ Ν δὲ > 5 , ΝᾺ 5 
μῆκος ἐκλύει τὴν σφοδρότητα, τὸ δὲ ἐν ὀλίγῳ πολὺ ἐμ- 
φαινόμενον δεινότερον: παράδειγμα τὸ Λακεδαιμονίων 
πρὸς Φίλιππον, “ Διονύσιος ἐν Κορίνθῳ" εἰ δὲ ἐξέτειναν 

“) 4 « 4 5 Ν “ > lal “2 5 4 
αὐτό, “Διονύσιος ἐκπεσὼν τῆς ἀρχῆς πτωχεύει ἐν Κορίνθῳ 
ὃ ὃ ΄,ὔ ΄ ) ὃ ΄ δὸ ΓΝ > an > \ 

LOATKOV γράμματα, διήγημα σχεὸον av HY μᾶλλον ἀντὶ 
λοιδορίας. 

242. Κἀν τοῖς ἄλλοις δὲ φύσει ἐβραχυλόγουν οἱ 

» , \ Q \ a 9 , \ 
Λάκωνες: δεινότερον yap τὸ βραχὺ Kat ἐπιτακτικόν, TO 
μακρηγορεῖν δὲ τῷ ἱκετεύειν πρέπει καὶ αἰτεῖν. 

243. Διὸ καὶ τὰ σύμβολα ἔχει δεινότητας, | ὅτι ἐμφερῆ 
ταῖς βραχυλογίαις: καὶ γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ βραχέως ῥηθέντος 
ὑπονοῆσαι τὰ πλεῖστα δεῖ, καθάπερ ἐκ τῶν συμβόλων' 

ο Lat 3, 
οὕτως καὶ τὸ “χαμόθεν οἱ τέττιγες ὑμῖν ἀσονται᾿ δεινό- 

3 an ε θέ » + ς λῶ 3 40 ‘ \ 

τερον ἀλληγορικῶς ῥηθέν, ἢ εἴπερ ἁπλῶς ἐρρήθη, “τὰ 
an ᾽ 
δένδρα ὑμῶν ἐκκοπήσεται. 

244. Τάς γε μὴν περιόδους ἐσφίγχθαι μάλα δεῖ κατὰ 

\ , e Ν Ν ὃ ᾽ὔ e δὲ λύ ε 2 
τὸ τέλος: ἡ γὰρ περιαγωγὴ δεινόν, ἡ δὲ λύσις ἁπλούστε- 


I περὶ δεινότητος titulus in P, eadem verba in margine P. 4 ware τοὺς ex 
ὥσπερ (στε τοὺς supra versum scripto) P. 5 λέγουσιν P. 8 ὀνόματα (ὄντα 
supra versum atram. pallid. add.) Ρ. 19 ἐπιτατικὸν P. 20 τὸ ἱκετεύειν Ῥ. 
21 ἐμφερῆ ex ἐμφέρει P. 24 τέττηγες (y punctis notato) P. 25 ἐρρήθη. 


ex ἠρρέθη (ε supra ἡ et ἡ supra ε scripto) Ρ. 27 κατὰ] Victorius, καὶ P. 


242" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 181 


CIBUMIP IE IR We 


240. We now come to the quality of force. It is clear, 
from what has already been said, that force also, like the 
styles previously described, may have three sources. Some 
things are forcible in themselves, so that those who give 
utterance to them seem to be forcible, even if they do not 
speak forcibly. Theopompus, for instance, in a certain 
passage describes the flute-girls in the Peiraeus, the stews, 
and the sailors who pipe and sing and dance; and through 
employing all this strong language he seems to be forcible, 
although his style is really feeble. 

241. In respect of composition this type of style re- 
quires, first of all, phrases in place of members. Prolixity 
paralyses vigour, while much meaning conveyed in a brief 
form is the more forcible. An example is the message of 
the Lacedaemonians to Philip: ‘Dionysius at Corinth. If 
they had expanded the thought at full length, saying 
‘Dionysius has been deposed from his sovereignty and is 
now a beggarly schoolmaster at Corinth, the result would 
have been a bit’of narrative rather than a taunt?. 

242. The Lacedaemonians had a natural turn for 
brevity of speech under all circumstances. Brevity is, indeed, 
more forcible and peremptory, while prolixity is suited for 
begging and praying. 

243. For this reason symbolic expressions are forcible, 
as resembling brief utterances. We are left to infer the chief 
of the meaning from a short statement, as though it were a 
sort of riddle. Thus the saying ‘your cicalas shall chirp 
from the ground’ is more forcible in this figurative form 
than if the sentence had simply run ‘your trees shall be 
hewed down?’ ; 

244. In this style the periods should be brought to a 
definite point at the end. The periodic form is forcible, while 
looseness of structure is more naive and betokens an innocent 


1 Cf. § 8 supra. 2 Cp. 88 99, 100 supra. 


on 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


182 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


Ν A an 
pov καὶ χρηστοηθείας σημεῖον, καθάπερ ἡ ἀρχαία πᾶσα 
ἑρμηνεία: ἁπλοϊκοὶ γὰρ οἱ ἀρχαῖοι. 

Ψ an 
245. Ὥστε ἐν δεινότητι φεύγειν Set τὸ ἀρχαιοειδὲς 
Ν an OY “ an 
Kal τοῦ ἤθους καὶ τοῦ ῥυθμοῦ, καὶ καταφεύγειν μάλιστα 
ἐπὶ τὴν νῦν κατέχουσαν δεινότητα. τῶν οὖν κώλων αἱ 
τοιαῦται ἀποθέσεις, “ ὡμολόγησα τούτοις, ὡς ἂν οἷός τε 
ὦ, συνερεῖν, ἔχονται μάλιστα οὗ εἴρηκα ῥυθμοῦ. 

246. Ποιεῖ δέ τινα καὶ ἡ βία κατὰ τὴν σύνθεσιν 

4 Ν Ν lal Ν Ν 4 
δεινότητα: δεινὸν yap πολλαχοῦ καὶ τὸ δύσφθογγον, 
ν ε 3 4 ε 4 / N \ 
ὥσπερ αἱ ἀνώμαλοι ὁδοί. παράδειγμα τὸ Δημοσθενικὸν 

\ la “ “ an 
TO “ὑμᾶς TO δοῦναι ὑμῖν ἐξεῖναι. 

247. Τὰ δὲ ἀντίθετα καὶ παρόμοια ἐν ταῖς περιόδοις 
φευκτέον: ὄγκον γὰρ ποιοῦσιν, οὐ δεινότητα, πολλαχοῦ 
δὲ Ν ΄, 3 \ ὃ ΄ ΩΣ ε ε ΄ 
ἐ καὶ ψυχρότητα ἀντὶ δεινότητος, οἷον ὡς ὁ Θεόπομπος 

Ν las ε ,ὔ ἴων 4 / A “Ὁ > 
κατὰ τῶν eTalpwv τῶν Φιλίππου λέγων ἔλυσεν TH ἄντι- 

΄ Ν 4 Case: / Ν Ν ΄ὔ + ) 
θέσει τὴν δεινότητα, “ἀνδροφόνοι δὲ τὴν φύσιν ὄντες, 
λέγων, “ἀνδροπόρνοι τὸν τρόπον ἦσαν" τῇ yap περισ- 

4 la ἊΝ 4 4 ε 3 \ 
σοτεχνίᾳ, μᾶλλον δὲ κακοτεχνίᾳ, προσέχων ὁ ἀκροατὴς 
ἔξω γίνεται θυμοῦ παντός. 

248. Πολλὰ μέντοι ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν τῶν πραγμάτων ὥσπερ 
ἀναγκασθησόμεθα συνθεῖναι στρογγύλως καὶ δεινῶς, οἷον 
τὸ Δημοσθενικὸν τὸ τοιοῦτον, “ὥσπερ γὰρ εἴ τις ἐκείνων 
ε΄ \ σῷ» 3 ΕΝ » i Ψ ΕΝ Ν A Nas 
ἑάλω, σὺ τάδ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἔγραψας" οὕτως ἂν σὺ νῦν ἁλῷς, 
A > ΄ , Ξ5Ν Ν \ “ Ν (3 ΄ 
ἄλλος οὐ γράψει αὐτὸ γὰρ τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ ἡ τάξις 

A an nan 3, Ν 
αὐτοῦ συμπεφυκυῖαν σαφῶς ἔσχεν τὴν σύνθεσιν, καὶ 

ὑδὲ βιασά i ῥᾳδίως ἑτέρως συνέθηκεν αὐτό 
οὐδὲ βιασάμενος av τις ῥᾳδίως ἑτέρως συνέθη : 

“ ’ 4 ν ε Ν 
ἐν γὰρ πολλοῖς πράγμασι συντίθεμεν, ὥσπερ οἱ τὰς 
καταβάσεις τρέχοντες, ὑπ᾽ αὐτῶν ἑλκόμενοι τῶν πραγ- 
μάτων. 

249. Ποιητικὸν δὲ δεινότητός ἐστι καὶ τὸ ἐπὶ τέλει 


2 οἱ ἀρχαῖοι] Spengelius, ἀρχαῖοι P: fort. ἁρχαῖοι. Ι4. Oewornrx, o supra 
lituram scripto. 15 κατὰ bis in transitu versuum scripsit P. | ἑτέρων P. τό on 
τὴν ἀντίθεσιν in margine P. 21 στρογγύλως, σ posterius supra versum addito, P. 
23 σὺ τάδ᾽ Demosth.: σὺ δ᾽ P. 25 συμπεφυκυῖαν] Victorius, συμπεφυκυῖα P. 


27 συντίθεμεν : ν posterius in rasura P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 183 


nature. This is true of all old-fashioned style, the ancients 
being distinguished by naiveté. 

245. It follows that, in the forcible style, we must avoid 
old-fashioned traits both of character and of rhythm, and 
regard the forcible style at present in vogue as our special 
goal. Now, for the members, cadences of the following kind, 
‘T have agreed to plead, to the best of my ability, my clients’ 
casel, keep closest to the rhythm I have mentioned. 

246. Even violence conveys a certain impression of 
energy in composition. Yes, in many passages harshness 
gives all the effect of vehemence, as though we were jolted 
on rough roads. Demosthenes’ words are a case in point: 
‘(he has deprived) you of the bestowal—you of the pre- 
rogative?.’ 

247. We should avoid antitheses and exact parallelisms 
of words in the period, since in place of force they render the 
style laboured and often frigid. Theopompus, for example, 
when inveighing against the intimates of Philip, enfeebled his 
invective by the following antithesis: ‘men-slayers in nature, 
they were men-harlots in life*’ The hearer, having his 
attention fixed on this elaboration, or rather affectation, 
forgets to be angry. 

248. We shall often find ourselves constrained by the 
very nature of the subject-matter to construct sentences 
which are rounded, indeed, but forcible too, as in the follow- 
ing passage of Demosthenes: ‘Just as you would not have 
made this proposal if any of the former parties had been 
convicted, so if you are convicted now no one will do so 
in future*’ This particular arrangement obviously grew 
naturally out of the subject and the order of words evoked 
by it. Not even by violent perversion could a writer easily 
have framed the sentence otherwise. There are many topics 
in handling which we are swept along by the subject itself, 
just as though we were running down a slope. 

249. It also conduces to force to place the most forcible 


1 Cp. §§ 10, 20, 31 supra. 2 Demosth. Ze. init. 
3 Theopomp. Fragm. 249: cp. ὃ 27 supra. 
4 Demosth. Aristocr. gg: cp. § 31 supra. 


σι 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


184 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


θέ Ν ὃ ΄ . , \ > ΄, 
τιθέναι τὸ δεινότατον περιλαμβανόμενον γὰρ ἐν μέσῳ 
ἀμβλύνεται, καθάπερ τὸ ᾿Αντισθένους, “σχεδὸν γὰρ 
δ 

ὀδυνήσει ἄνθρωπος ἐκ φρυγάνων ἀναστάς" εἰ γὰρ μετα- 
συνθείη τις οὕτως αὐτό, “σχεδὸν γὰρ ἐκ φρυγάνων ἀναστὰς 
> 3, 
ἄνθρωπος ὀδυνήσει, καίτοι ταὐτὸν εἰπὼν οὐ ταὐτὸν ἔτι 
νομισθήσεται λέγειν. 

250. ‘“H δὲ ἀντίθεσις, ἣν ἐπὶ τοῦ Θεοπόμπου ἔφην, 
οὐδὲ ἐν τοῖς Δημοσθενικοῖς ἥρμοσεν, ἔνθα φησίν, "ἐτέλεις, 
5 \ \ > 4 507, 5 Ν Ν 5 / ? 
ἐγὼ δὲ ἐτελούμην: ἐδίδασκες, ἐγὼ δὲ ἐφοίτων: éTpiTayo- 
7 5 Χ Ν > / > / > ἊΝ Ν 5 4 ) 
νίστεις, ἐγὼ δὲ ἐθεώμην: ἐξέπιπτες, ἐγὼ δὲ ἐσύριττον" 
κακοτεχνοῦντι γὰρ ἔοικεν διὰ τὴν ἀνταπόδοσιν, μᾶλλον 
δὲ παίζοντι, οὐκ ἀγανακτοῦντι. 

251. Πρέπει δὲ τῇ δεινότητι καὶ τῶν περιόδων ἡ 
πυκνότης, καίτοι ἐν τοῖς λοιποῖς χαρακτῆρσιν οὐκ ἐπιτη- 
δεία οὖσα: συνεχῶς γὰρ τιθεμένη μέτρῳ εἰκασθήσεται λε- 

΄ > lo Q lal “ 2 ν ε 7) 
γομένῳ ἐφεζῆς, καὶ τοῦτο δεινῷ μέτρῳ, ὥσπερ οἱ χωλίαμβοι. 

252. “Apa μέντοι πυκναὶ ἔστωσαν καὶ σύντομοι, 
λέγω δὲ δίκωλοί τινες, ἐπεί τοι πολύκωλοί γε οὖσαι κάλλος 

Ta ΄ 3 ΄ 
μᾶλλον παρέξουσιν, οὐ δεινότητα. 
ν 3 ΕἸ 4 an “~ , 

253. Οὕτω δ᾽ ἡ συντομία To χαρακτῆρι χρήσιμον, | 
ὥστε καὶ ἀποσιωπῆσαι πολλαχοῦ δεινότερον, καθάπερ 
6 Δημοσθένης: “ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ μέν, οὐ βούλομαι δὲ δυσχερὲς 
οὐδὲν εἰπεῖν, οὗτος δὲ ἐκ περιουσίας κατηγορεῖ. σχεδὸν 
ὁ σιωπήσας ἐνταῦθα δεινότερος παντὸς τοῦ εἰπόντος ἀν. 

254. Καὶ νὴ τοὺς θεοὺς σχεδὸν [ἂν] καὶ ἡ ἀσάφεια 

n Ν 
πολλαχοῦ δεινότης ἐστί: δεινότερον γὰρ τὸ ὑπονοούμενον, 
τὸ δ᾽ ἐξαπλωθὲν καταφρονεῖται. 
y > ν , / Lal \ 
255. ἔστι ὃ om κακοφωνία δεινότητα ποιει, και 


fa) ν 
μάλιστα, ἐὰν τὸ ὑποκείμενον πρᾶγμα δέῃ τοιαύτης, ὥσπερ 


YG , \ 

To Ὁμηρικὸν, To 
3, 4 GvaoTas...... φρυγάνων in margine supplevit P. 5 ἄνθρωπος in 
compend. et ras. P. | ὀδυνήσει dedi: ὀδυνήσειε P. 10 ἐσύρριττον Ῥ. 
15 συνεχῶς) edd., συνεχεῖ P. 15, 16 λεγομένω P. | δεινῶ μέτρωι supra ὥσπερ 
scripsit m. rec. P. 18 πολύκωλοι: πολύ supra versum scripsit P. | ye] 
Goellerus, τε P. 24 ὁ] Weilius, ws P. | ἂν secl. edd. 27 ἐξαπλωθὲν : ev 


eodem compendio quo -evoy ν. 29 infra. 


2427 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 185 


expression at the end. If this be surrounded and enveloped, 
its point is blunted. Let the following sentence of Antis- 
thenes serve as an example: ‘almost torment will be caused 
by a man from brushwood started’’ If a writer were to 
change the order thus, ‘almost will a man from brush- 
wood started cause torment, he will be saying the same 
thing but will no longer be believed to be saying the 
same. 

250. Excessive antithesis, already condemned in the 
case of Theopompus, is out of place even in Demosthenes, as 
in the following passage: ‘ You were initiating, I was initiated ; 
you taught, I attended classes; you took minor parts in 
the theatre, | was a spectator; you broke down, I hissed*, 
The elaborate parallelism of clauses produces the impression 
of false artifice ; of trifling, rather than of honest indignation. 

251. An uninterrupted series of periods, although inap- 
propriate in other styles, is favourable to force. Its crowded 
succession will convey the impression of line recited after 
line,—forcible lines like the choliambic. 

252. These massed periods should, however, be short 
(of two members, say), since many-membered periods will 
produce the feeling of beauty rather than of force. 

253. Conciseness is so favourable to this style that a 
sudden lapse into silence is often yet more forcible, as when 
Demosthenes says: ‘I could on my part...but I do not 
desire to say anything offensive; only, my opponent accuses 
at a great advantage®’ The orator’s reserve is here more 
effective than any possible retort could have been. 

254. And (strange though it may seem) obscurity often 
produces force, since what is distantly hinted is more forcible, 
while what is plainly stated is held cheap. 

255. Occasionally cacophony produces vigour, espe- 
cially if the subject requires harshness of sound, as in Homer's 
line :— 


1 Antisth. fragm. 67, Mullach F. Ph. G. τι. p. 286. 

2 Demosth. de Cor. 265. 

3 Demosth. de Cor. 3, ἀλλ᾽ ἐμοὶ μὲν---οὐ βούλομαι δυσχερὲς εἰπεῖν οὐδὲν ἀρχόμενος 
τοῦ λόγου, οὗτος δ᾽ ἐκ περιουσίας μου κατηγορεῖ. 


186 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


Τρώες δ᾽ ἐρρίγησαν, ὅπως ἴδον αἰόλον ὄφιν" 
Ὄ \ Ν Ν 3 ΄ J γᾺ ~ \ ΄ 
ἣν μὲν γὰρ καὶ εὐφωνοτέρως εἰπόντα σῶσαι τὸ μέτρον, 
Τρῶες δ᾽ ἐρρίγησαν, ὅπως ὄφιν αἰόλον εἶδον' 
> 5 3 iY 
ἀλλ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἂν ὁ λέγων δεινὸς οὕτως ἔδοξεν, οὔτε ὁ ὄφις 
5 αὐτός. 
256. Τούτῳ οὖν ἑπόμενοι τῷ παραδείγματι καὶ τὰ 
5, ἔν a ἴω 
ἄλλα προσστοχασόμεθα τὰ ὅμοια, οἷον ἀντὶ μὲν τοῦ 
5 , a ¥ » @ 2 PS τ 19 N δὲ Dog 115 
πάντα ἂν ἔγραψεν᾿ “ἔγραψεν αν, ἀντὶ δὲ τοῦ ‘ οὐ παρε- 
γένετο᾽ “ παρεγένετο οὐχί. 
3 Ν 
10 257. ᾿Απολήγοντες δέ ποτε Kal εἰς συνδέσμους τὸν 
« ὃ Ν oN \ ¢ ΕΣ ΄ ΄ o \ > / 
ἐ᾿ ἢ τὸν ‘Te’ καίτοι παραγγέλλεται φυγεῖν THY ἀπόλη ξιν 
Ν Ν “ 
τὴν τοιαύτην: ἀλλὰ πολλαχοῦ χρήσιμος τοιαύτη ἂν γένοιτο, 
- ‘ 3 3 , a 3», 2, ) 7 ZN 
οἷον “οὐκ εὐφήμησε μέν, ἄξιον ὄντα, ἠτίμασε δέ’ ἢ ὡς 
Χ lal nan aA nw 
TO “Σχοῖνόν τε Σκῶλόν Te, ἀλλ᾽ ἐν μὲν Tots Ὁμηρικοῖς 


Cl 
σι 


/ > ,’ ε > Ν / 4 
μέγεθος ἐποίησεν ἡ εἰς τοὺς συνδέσμους τελευτή. 
+ » a 
258. Ποιήσειε δ᾽ av ποτε καὶ δεινότητα, εἴ τις ὧδε 
»» ca ΄ OG Ν ia} > / «ε Ν ios 5 ΄ 
εἴποι ἀνέτρεψεν δὲ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀφροσύνης τε ὑπὸ τῆς ἀσεβείας 
Ν ε , \ ν / > 4 \ ε 4 Ν Ν 
τε TA ἱερά τε τὰ ὁσιά TE’ ὅλως yap ἡ λειότης καὶ TO 
᾽,ὔ aA 5 / / > “Ὁ 
εὐήκοον γλαφυρότητος ἴδια, οὐ δεινότητός ἐστιν, οὗτοι 
5 ε lal Qn 
200 οἱ χαρακτῆρες ἐναντιώτατοι δοκοῦσιν. 
259. Καίτοι ἐστὶ πολλαχοῦ ἐκ παιδιᾶς παραμεμιγ- 
a ἴω 4 
μένης δεινότης ἐμφαινομένη τις, οἷον ἐν ταῖς κωμῳδίαις, 
“ Ν Ν 
καὶ πᾶς ὁ Κυνικὸς τρόπος, ὡς τὰ Κράτητος 
πήρη τις γαῖ ἔστι μέσῳ ἐνὶ οἴνοπι τύφῳ. 


> [2 ἴω 
260. Καὶ τὸ Διογένους τὸ ἐν Ολυμπίᾳ, ὅτε τοῦ 


τὸ 
σι 


ε ΄, ΄ 5 ΄ aL 3N > ΄ ε \ 
Om\LTOU δραμόντος ET LT PEK WV αὕὔυτος EKY PUTTEV εαυτον 
a 9 9 ΄ ΄ 3 ΄ 3 , ‘\ 
νικαν TQ Ολύμπια παντας ἀνθρώπους καλοκἀγαθίᾳ. και 
Ν la) Ν 5 7 Ν / Ν 5 ΄ 
γὰρ γελᾶται TO εἰρημένον αμα και θαυμάζεται, και ηρβρεμα. 

Ν ΄ ΄ 
και ὑποδάκνει πως λεγόμενον. 

4 6ante ὄφις add. Finckhius. 7 προσστοχασόμεθα] Goellerus, mpooro- 
χασόμεθα P. 8 πάντα ἂν ἔγραψεν ἔγραψεν ἂν] edd., πάντων ἔγραψεν ἂν P. 
IO o7 in margine P. 13 ἢ inserui. 14 σκῶλον: o Supra versum add. 
atram. pall. P. 17 ἀνέτρεψεν] Weilius, ἄν. ἔγραψεν P. 21 παιδιᾶς: ἂς 


supra versum add. m. rec. P. 24 πήρη] Victorius, τὸ ποτήρη P. | γαῖ} 
Victorius, yap P. | τύφῳ] Victorius, πόντῳ P. 28 πρὸς τὸ P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 187 
Then shuddered the Trojans, beholding the writhing serpent’. 


It would have been possible to construct the line more 
euphoniously, without violating the metre, thus :— 


Then shuddered the Trojans, the writhing serpent beholding. 


But there would then have seemed to be nothing terrific 
whether in the speaker or in the serpent itself. 

256. On this model we may venture other similar ex- 
periments, such as the order ἔγραψεν ἄν in place of (πανταὶ) 
ἄν ἔγραψεν or παρεγένετο οὐχί in place of οὐ παρεγένετο. 

257. In this style we shall, also, sometimes end with 
the conjunctions δέ or τέ, notwithstanding the instructions 
we have received to avoid terminations of the kind. Such 
endings are often useful, as in the words ‘ He did not praise 
him, though he deserved it ; he insulted him, on the contrary 
(ἠτίμασε δέ)"᾽; or as in ‘Schoenus too, Scolus too®’ In 
Homer elevation is the result of ending thus with conjunc- 
tions. 

258. Force of style will also mark a sentence of this 
kind: ‘He turned upside down, in his folly and his impiety 
too, things sacred and things holy too. As a general rule, 
smoothness and a pleasant cadence are characteristic of the 
elegant rather than the forcible style; and these two styles 
seem to be direct opposites. 

259. In many passages there is an air of vigour due to 
a dash of fun. This is so in comedies; and all the Cynic 
manner is of this character. Crates’ words are an instance in 
Comedy :— 


There lieth a dim land under a lurid smoke-pall smothered*. 


260. So with a saying of Diogenes at Olympia, when 
(at the conclusion of the race between the men in armour) 
he ran up and proceeded to proclaim himself victor at the 
Olympic games over all mankind—in high personal character. 
This exclamation excites mingled laughter and applause, 
and there is a light touch of mordant wit about it too. 


1 Hom. 77. xii. 208. 2 Scr. Inc. 3 Hom. 77. ii. 497- 
4 Cratetis fragm. 7, Bergk*. - 


188 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIAS 


261. Kat τὸ πρὸς τὸν καλὸν ῥηθὲν αὐτῷ: προσ- 
4 Ἂν IN Ν i? 4 Ν 
παλαίων γὰρ καλῷ παιδὶ Διογένης διεκινήθη πως τὸ 
αἰδοῖον, τοῦ δὲ παιδὸς φοβηθέντος καὶ ἀποπηδήσαντος, 
A θ , > δή 2 3 ἌΝ ΄ y ) la \ 
Appel, ὦ TALOLOV’ οὐκ εἰμὶ ταύτῃ ὅμοιος. γελοῖον yap 
\ t? la) / ἊΣ 3 ε tA »» 
5 τὸ πρόχειρον τοῦ λόγου, δεινὴ δ᾽ ἡ κευθομένη ἔμφασις. 
Y @ ΄ , rn N > rn an 
καὶ OAWS, συνελόντι φράσαι, πᾶν τὸ εἶδος τοῦ Κυνικοῦ 
λόγου σαίνοντι ἅμα ἔοικέ τῳ καὶ δάκνοντι. 
262. Χρήσονται δ᾽ αὐτῷ καὶ οἱ ῥήτορές ποτε, καὶ 
5 aM) : [PYEQLSS , 
ἐχρήσαντο, Λυσίας μὲν πρὸς τὸν ἐρῶντα τῆς γραὸς λέγων, 
Ψ 5 en Ss 5 “ \ 5 , ΕΣ Ν ΄ ) 
το ὅτι ‘HS ῥᾷον ἣν ἀριθμῆσαι τοὺς ὀδόντας ἢ τοὺς δακτύλους: 
καὶ γὰρ δεινότατα ἅμα καὶ γελοιότατα ἐνέφηνεν τὴν γραῦν" 
. Ν Ni ‘ ον > Ν , y ? ε 4 
Opnpos δὲ τὸ “Οὖτιν ἐγὼ πύματον ἔδομαι, ws mpoye- 
γραπται. 
263. Ὥς δ᾽ ἂν καὶ ἐκ σχημάτων γίγνοιτο δεινότης, 
15 λέξομεν. ἐκ μὲν οὖν τῶν τῆς διανοίας σχημάτων, ἐκ μὲν 
A ΄ 3 ΄ Ψ «Ὁ ᾿ 
τῆς παραλείψεως ὀνομαζομένης οὕτως: “Ὄλυνθον μὲν 
δὴ καὶ Μεθώνην καὶ ᾿Απολλωνίαν καὶ δύο καὶ τριάκοντα 
΄ Ν ΕΣ , aA) 3 \ ΄ Ν oy, 
πόλεις τὰς ἐπὶ Θράκης ἐῶ: ἐν yap τούτοις καὶ εἴρηκεν | 
’ ν 5 ΄ \ Lo 5 ΄ ε 
πάντα, ὅσα ἐβούλετο, καὶ παραλιπεῖν αὐτά φησιν, ὡς 
20 δεινότερα εἰπεῖν ἔχων ἕτερα. 
Ν ε 4 > 5 4 lal 3 ~ 
264. Καὶ ἡ προειρημένη δ᾽ ἀποσιώπησις τοῦ αὐτοῦ 
ἤθους ἐχομένη δεινότερον ποιήσει τὸν λόγον. 
265. Παραλαμβάνοιτο δ᾽ ἂν σχῆμα διανοίας πρὸς 
δεινότητα ἡ προσωποποιΐα καλουμένη, οἷον “ δόξατε ὑμῖν 
\ , > , \ , ΄ N ἂν N 
“τοὺς προγόνους ὀνειδίζειν καὶ λέγειν τάδε τινὰ ἢ τὴν 
Ἑλλάδα ἣ τὴν πατρίδα, λαβοῦσαν γυναικὸς σχῆμα. 
266. Ὥσπερ ἐν τῷ ἐπιταφίῳ Πλάτων τὸ “ ὦ παῖδες, 
S; ΄ 3 4 3 IN 2 Ν 3 3 Le) 530 7 
ὅτι μέν ἐστε πατέρων ἀγαθῶν, καὶ οὐκ ἐκ τοῦ ἰδίου 
uA 4 > Ν > las -” 4 Ν ἊΝ 
προσώπου λέγειν, ἀλλὰ ἐκ τοῦ τῶν πατέρων: πολὺ γὰρ 


7 σαίνοντι : t prius in ras P. 10 ῥάδιον P. Ir δεινότατον...γελοιότατον 
Ρ, dewdrara...yedoubraTa (a...a Supra versum pallid. atram. scripto) m. rec. P. 
12 ovrw P. 14,15 γίγνοιτο... σχημάτων in margine P. τό παραλήψεως P. 
17 μοθώνην P. | ἀπολωνίαν Ρ. 21 καὶ 7 προειρημένη] Finckhius, καὶ 


0 


mp? ἡ εἰρημένη P. 22 %Oovs] Victorius, ἔθους P. 24 ἡ ins. Hammerus. 


243° 


DEMETRIUS. ON STYLE 189 


261. So also with his words to the handsome youth, 
when wrestling with whom Diogenes unawares assumed an 
unseemly position. The lad was frightened and started back. 
‘Never fear, my dear boy,’ he exclaimed, ‘I am not your 
match in ¢hat way. There is wit in the ready reply and 
point in the hidden meaning. And it may be said in general 
that every variety of Cynic speech reminds you of a dog 
that is ready to bite even while he fawns. 

262. Orators will always employ, as they always have 
employed, this weapon of sarcasm. Witness Lysias and his 
remark to an old woman’s lover that ‘it was easier to count 
her teeth than her fingers’’ He has represented the grandam 
in a most repulsive and a most ridiculous light. So, too, 
Homer with his already quoted words ‘ Noman will I eat last,’ 

263. We shall next show how force can be secured by 
rhetorical figures. It can be secured by figures conveying 
the speaker’s thought. Take, for instance, that which is 
called ‘praetermission, e.g. ‘I pass over Olynthus, Methone, 
Apollonia, and the two-and-thirty towns on the confines of 
Thrace®.’ In these words the orator has said everything he 
wished, while professing to have passed everything over in 
his desire to proceed to weightier matters. 

264. The figure ‘aposiopesis’ already mentioned, which 
partakes of the same character, will also make expression 
more forcible. 

265. Another figure of thought—the so-called ‘ proso- 
popoeia —may be employed to produce energy of style, as in 
the words: ‘Imagine that your ancestors, or Hellas, or your 
native land, assuming a woman’s form, should address such 
and such reproaches to νοι 

266. Plato uses the figure in his Funeral Oration: 
‘Children, that you are sprung from noble sires, εἴς. He 
does not speak in his own name, but in that of their ances- 


1 Lys. Fragm. (cp. § 128 supra). 2 Hom. Odyss. ix. 369: cp. § 130 supra. 
3 Demosth. Phz/ipp. iii. 26. 4 Scr. Inc. 5 Plat. Menex. 246 Ὁ. 


190 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡΙ EPMHNEIAS 


ἐνεργέστερα καὶ δεινότερα φαίνεται ὑπὸ τῶν προσώπων, 
μᾶλλον δὲ δράματα ἀτεχνῶς γίνεται. 
" A 
267. Ta μὲν εἴδη τῆς διανοίας καὶ σχήματα λαμ- 
ζ, > A ε » Ν lo 
Bavouwr av, ὡς εἴρηται: καὶ yap τοσαῦτα τὰ εἰρημένα 

5 παραδείγματος ἕνεκα, τὰ δὲ τῆς λέξεως σχήματα ποικι- 
λώτερον ἐκλέγοντά ἐστι δεινότερον ποιεῖν τὸν λόγον, ἔκ 
τε τῆς ἀναδιπλώσεως, ὡς “Θῆβαι δέ, Θῆβαι, πόλις ἀστυ- 

΄ nA ε 
γείτων, ἐκ: μέσης τῆς “Βλλάδος ἀνήρπασται:᾽ διλογηθὲν 
γὰρ τὸ ὄνομα δεινότητα ποιεῖ. 

10 208. Καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἀναφορᾶς καλουμένης, ὡς τὸ “ἐπὶ 
σαυτὸν καλεῖς, ἐπὶ τοὺς νόμους καλεῖς, ἐπὶ τὴν δημο- 
κρατίαν καλεῖς" τὸ δὲ σχῆμα τὸ εἰρημένον τοῦτο τρι- 
πλοῦν: καὶ γὰρ ἐπαναφορά ἐστιν, ὡς εἴρηται, διὰ τὸ τὴν 

3 Ν / > / SEEN Ν > ἣν 3 ΄ \ 
αὐτὴν λέξιν ἐπαναφέρεσθαι ἐπὶ τὴν αὐτὴν ἀρχήν, καὶ 
5 4 / \ 4 / Ν ε 4 

15 ἀσύνδετον: δίχα yap συνδέσμων λέλεκται, Kal ὁμοιοτέ. 
λευτον διὰ τὴν ἀπόληξιν τοῦ “καλεῖς πολλάκις. καὶ 
δεινότης ἤθροισται ἐκ τῶν τριῶν, εἰ δ᾽ εἴποι τις οὕτως, 
“ἐπὶ σαυτὸν καὶ τοὺς νόμους καὶ τὴν δημοκρατίαν καλεῖς, 
ἅμα τοῖς σχήμασιν ἐξαιρήσει καὶ τὴν δεινότητα. 

20 269. Μάλιστα δὲ πάντων ἰστέον τὴν διάλυσιν δεινό- 

ὩΣ \ a an 
τητος ἐργάτιν, οἷον ‘ πορεύεται διὰ τῆς ἀγορᾶς τὰς γνάθους 
“ Ν 5 ley > ’ = / C7} > 
φυσῶν, Tas ὀφρῦς ἐπηρκώς, ἴσα βαίνων ἸΤυθοκλεῖ᾽- εἰ 
γὰρ συναφθῇ ταῦτα συνδέσμοις, πρᾳότερα ἔσται. 
: n ν 
270. Λαμβάνοιτ᾽ ἂν καὶ ἡ κλίμαξ καλουμένη, ὥσπερ 
,ω5 Δημοσθένει τὸ “οὐκ εἶπον μὲν ταῦτα, οὐκ ἔγραψα 
δέ 50.359 =» ΄ > 5 2 δέ δ᾽ 3 ΄ 
ἔς οὐδ᾽ ἔγραψα μέν, οὐκ ἐπρέσβευσα δέ οὐδ᾽ ἐπρέσ- 
/ 5 + δὲ ΄ δὸ \ > 
Bevoa μέν, οὐκ ἔπεισα δὲ Θηβαίους" σχεδὸν yap ἐπανα- 
΄ὔ ε / y > \ / 7 5 A 
Batvovtt 6 λόγος ἔοικεν ἐπὶ μειζόνων μείζονα: εἰ δὲ 


Ψ » an CO EN SEN Ν ΄ 3 ΄ ΄ὕ 
ουτως ειἰποιτις TAVTA, ELT WV eyo και γράψας ἐπρέσβευσά 


2 ἀτέχνως Ρ. 3 λαμβάνοιτ᾽ : ν in transitu versus bis scripsit, prius tamen 
ν postea delevit P. 11 ἐπὶ τοὺς νόμους καλεῖς ex Aesch. Cres. supplevit Victorius. 
13 ἐστιν, ws] Victorius, tows P. 16 καλεῖς] edd., καλεῖσθαι P. 18 ἐπὶ 
σαυτὸν] Victorius, ἐπαυτὸν P. 24 κλίμαξ in margine P. 26 οὐδ᾽ ἐπρέσβευσα 
μὲν in margine add. P. 27 ἀθηναίους P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE ΙΟΙ 


tors. The personification makes the passage much more 
vehement and forcible, or rather makes it quite dramatic. 

267. The forms and figures of thought will, therefore, 
be employed in the way described; the instances cited may 
suffice to serve asa sample. As for the figures of language, 
the more ingeniously they are chosen, the more forcible can 
discourse be made. Take the figure ‘reduplication, as for 
example: ‘Thebes, Thebes, our neighbour-state, has been 
torn from the heart of Greece’’ The repetition of the proper 
name has a powerful effect. 

268. The same thing is true of the figure ‘anaphora,’ 
as in the words: ‘against yourself you summon him; against 
the laws you summon him; against the democracy you 
summon him’. Here the figure in question is threefold. It 
is, as has been already said, an ‘epanaphora, because of the 
repetition of the same word at the commencement of each 
clause ; an ‘asyndeton, because of the absence of conjunc- 
tions ; and a‘ homoeoteleuton,’ because of the recurring termi- 
nation ‘you summon him. And force is the cumulative 
result of the three figures. Were we to write ‘against your- 
self and the laws and the democracy you summon him,’ the 
force would vanish together with the figures. 

269. It should be observed that, above all figures, 
disjunction is the handmaid of force: e.g. ‘he passes through 
the place of assembly, puffing out his cheeks, raising his 
eyebrows, walking in step with Pythocles*’ If the words be 
coupled by conjunctions, the effect will be tamer. 

270. The figure called ‘climax’ may also be employed. 
It is exemplified in the following sentence of Demosthenes: 
‘I did not speak thus, and then fail to move a resolution ; 
I did not move a resolution, and then fail to act as an 
envoy: I did not act as an envoy, and then fail to convince 
the Thebans*’ This sentence seems to climb ever higher 
and higher. If it were re-written thus, ‘having expressed 
my views and moved a resolution, I acted as an envoy and 


1 Aeschin. (265. 133. 2 Aeschin. Cées. 202. 
3 Demosth. de Falsa Leg. 442. 4 Demosth. de Cor. 179. 


192 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


τε Kal ἔπεισα Θηβαίους, διήγημα ἐρεῖ μόνον, δεινὸν δὲ 
οὐδέν. 

271. Καθόλου δὲ τῆς λέξεως τὰ σχήματα καὶ ὑπό- 
Kplow καὶ ἀγῶνα παρέχει τῷ λέγοντι, μάλιστα τὸ 

5 διαλελυμένον, τοῦτ᾽ ἔστι δεινότητα. καὶ περὶ μὲν τῶν 
σχημάτων ἀμφοτέρων τοσαῦτα. 

272. λΛέξις δὲ λαμβανέσθω πᾶσα, ὅση καὶ ἐν τῷ 
μεγαλοπρεπεῖ χαρακτῆρι, πλὴν οὐκ ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τέλος: 

Ν Ν 7 // > ὃ \ a ε NG a” 4 
Kal yap μεταφέροντά ἐστι δεινὰ ποιεῖν, ὡς TO “τῷ Πύθωνι 
/ Ν “ es 3.0.5 6 an ᾽ 

10 θρασυνομένῳ καὶ πολλῷ ῥέοντι καθ᾽ ὑμῶν. 

273. Καὶ εἰκασίας λέγοντα, ὡς τὸ Δημοσθένους, 
¢ “ Ν ΄ \ jp ©) 3 / “ / / 
τοῦτο TO ψήφισμα τὸν TOT ἐπιόντα TH πόλει κίνδυνον 
παρελθεῖν ἐποίησεν, ὥσπερ νέφος. 

274. Αἱ παραβολαὶ δὲ τῇ δεινότητι οὐκ ἐπιτήδειαι 

~ a ο an 3, 

15 διὰ τὸ μῆκος, οἷον τὸ “ ὥσπερ δὲ κύων γενναῖος, ἄπειρος, 
5 4 3 Ν 4 / vy) 4 \ Ν 3 ᾽ὔ 
ἀπρονοήτως ἐπὶ κάπρον φέρεται" κάλλος yap | καὶ ἀκρί- 

΄ 3 4 > ’ὔ ε Ν 4 / 
βειά τις ἐν τούτοις ἐμφαίνεται, ἡ δὲ δεινότης σφοδρόν τι 
βούλεται καὶ σύντομον, καὶ ἐγγύθεν πλήττουσιν ἔοικεν. 

275. Τίνεται δὲ καὶ ἐκ συνθέτου ὀνόματος δεινότης, 
Ψ ν ε ΄ ΄ an Pico 

20 ὥσπερ Kal ἡ συνήθεια συντίθησιν δεινῶς πολλά, “τὴν 
χαμαιτύπην᾽ καὶ “τὸν παραπλῆγα᾽ καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο τοιοῦτον" 
καὶ παρὰ τοῖς ῥήτορσι δὲ πολλὰ ἂν τις εὕροι τοιαῦτα. 

2706. Πειρᾶσθαι δὲ τὰ ὀνόματα πρεπόντως λέγειν 
τοῖς πράγμασιν, οἷον ἐπὶ μὲν τοῦ βίᾳ καὶ πανουργίᾳ δρά- 

ς 4 5) > Ν Ν Lal 4 ἊΝ ἴω, Ν 

25 σαντος “διεβιάσατο, ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ βίᾳ καὶ φανερῶς καὶ 
μετὰ ἀπονοίας “ ἐξέκοψεν, ἐξεῖλεν,᾽ ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ δολίως καὶ 
λαθραίως “ἐτρύπησεν᾽ ἢ “διέφυγεν, ἢ εἴ TL τοιοῦτον πρόσ- 
φορον τοῖς πράγμασιν ὄνομα. 

277. To δὲ ἐξαίρεσθαί πὼς λαμβανόμενον οὐ μέγε- 


30 θος ποιεῖ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ δεινότητα, ὡς τὸ “οὐ λέγειν 


1 θηβαίους ex ἀθηναίους P. μόνον ex μόνων P. | δεινῶν P. 11 elelkdoeas P. 
12 τότ᾽ : το extra lineam additum est in P. 25 διεβιάσατο] edd., διεβιβάσατο P. 
27 λαθραίως] Victorius, λάθρα ws P. | διέφυγεν] edd., διέφαγεν P. 30 δεινό- 


TyTa: ἡ in rasura P. 


243° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 193 


convinced the Thebans, it would be a mere recital of events, 
with nothing forcible about it. 

271. In a word, the figures of speech help the speaker 
in delivery and in debate; lending especially the effect 
of abruptness,—in other words, of energy.—With regard to 
both kinds of figures what has been said must suffice. 

272. In the forcible style the same kinds of diction 
may be employed as in the elevated style, but not with the 
same end in view. By the use of metaphor force can be 
gained, as in the words: ‘ Python was blustering and rushing 
upon you in full flood’ 

273. So, too, by the use of similes, as in Demosthenes’ 
expression : ‘this decree caused the danger which then threat- 
ened the city to pass by like a cloud?’ 

274. But poetical images do not suit the forcible style 
owing to their length: e.g. ‘like as a gallant hound, ignorant 
of danger, charges a boar recklessly*’ There is an air of 
beauty and finish about this sentence. But the forcible style 
demands a certain vehemence and terseness, and resembles 
combatants dealing blows at close quarters. 

275. Compound words also lend vigour, as is seen in 
those which usage often forms so forcibly, e.g. ‘earthward- 
hurled, ‘slant-shelving, and the like. Many equally good 
examples may be found in the orators. 

276. We should endeavour to use picturesque words. 
For example, we may say of a man who has acted violently 
and unscrupulously, that ‘he has elbowed his way through’ ; 
of one who has used violence openly and recklessly, that ‘he 
has hewed his way through, he has swept aside obstacles’ ; 
of one who has had recourse to guile and evasion, that ‘he 
has wormed his way,’ or ‘slipped through,—or whatever 
expression is equally appropriate to the subject. 

277. A discreet use of elaborate language produces 
not only dignity but vigour of style. For instance: ‘You 


1 Demosth. de Cor. 136: cp. § 80 supra. 2 Demosth. de Cor. 188. 
3 Xenoph. Cyrop. i. 4, 21: cp. § 89 supra. 
R. 13 


σι 


10 


15 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


30 


194 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


» κ rn » A > ΄ > \ , 
εἰσω τὴν χεῖρα ἔχοντα δεῖ, Αἰσχίνη, ἀλλὰ πρεσβεύειν 
» A 

εἴσω τὴν χεῖρα ἔχοντα. 

278. Καὶ τὸ “ἀλλ᾽ ὁ τὴν Εὔβοιαν ἐκεῖνος σφετερι- 
ζόμενος" ᾿ οὐ γὰρ ὑπὲρ τοῦ μέγαν ποιῆσαι τὸν λόγον ἡ 
> , 9 5: wea ern an ΄ ΄ \ a 
ἐπανάστασις, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὲρ τοῦ δεινόν. γίνεται δὲ τοῦτο 
ἐπὰν μεταξὺ ἐξαρθέντες κατηγορῶμέν τινος: ὥσπερ γὰρ 

3 7, / Ν Ν » 5 4 
Αἰσχίνου κατηγορία, τὸ δὲ Φιλίππου ἐστίν. 
Ν Ν Ν Ν » Los Ν 5 4 A 

279. Δεινὸν δὲ καὶ τὸ ἐρωτῶντα τοὺς ἀκούοντας ἔνια 
λέγειν, καὶ μὴ ἀποφαινόμενον, ᾿ἀλλ᾽ ὃ τὴν Εὔβοιαν 
ἐκεῖνος σφετεριζόμενος καὶ κατασκευάζων ἐπιτείχισμα 
aN \ > 4 / “ an © / Ν y, 
ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αττικήν, πότερον ταῦτα ποιών ἠδίκει, καὶ ἔλυεν 
τὴν εἰρήνην, ἢ ov;’ καθάπερ γὰρ εἰς ἀπορίαν ἄγει τὸν 
5 4 > 4 3 ’ὔ Ν Ν 5 » 
ἀκούοντα ἐξελεγχομένῳ ἐοικότα καὶ μηδὲν ἀποκρίνασθαι 
ἔχοντι: εἰ δὲ ὧδε μεταβαλὼν ἔφη τις, " ἠδίκει καὶ ἔλυε 
Ν > 4 d lal / ) 22 Ν 5 3 ΄ὔ 
τὴν εἰρήνην, σαφῶς διδάσκοντι ἐῴκει καὶ οὐκ ἐλέγχοντι. 

280. Ἢ δὲ καλουμένη ἐπιμονὴ ἐστὶ μὲν ἑρμηνεία 

4, A 4, 4 Ν / ») “Ὁ > 
πλείων τοῦ πράγματος, μέγιστα δὲ συμβάλοιτ᾽ ἂν eis 
δεινότητα: παράδειγμα δὲ αὐτῆς τὸ Δημοσθένους, “νόσημα 
γάρ, ὦ ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, δεινὸν ἐμπέπτωκεν εἰς τὴν “EA- 

, 7 36% 3 “Ὁ -2 QD / 
hada: οὐκ ἂν οὕτως ἣν δεινόν. 

281. Τάχα δὲ καὶ ὁ εὐφημισμὸς καλούμενος μετέχοι 
“~ / Ν ε Ν 4 » ἴω Ν δὰ 
τῆς δεινότητος, καὶ ὁ τὰ δύσφημα εὔφημα ποιῶν, καὶ τὰ 
5 ΄ > ΄ “Ὁ ε ε Ν 4 "ἡ Qn 
ἀσεβήματα εὐσεβήματα, οἷον ws ὁ Tas Νίκας Tas χρυσᾶς 
χωνεύειν κελεύων καὶ καταχρῆσθαι τοῖς χρήμασιν εἰς τὸν 


5 πόλεμον οὐχ οὕτως εἶπεν προχείρως, ὅτι ‘ κατακόψωμεν 


Ν ΄ > N ΄ ) ΄ \ ὧν Ψ N 
τὰς Νίκας eis τὸν modEMov:’ δύσφημον yap ἂν οὕτως καὶ 
lo > Ν ν 
λοιδοροῦντι ἐοικὸς ἣν τὰς θεάς, ἀλλ᾽ εὐφημότερον, ὅτι 
πὸ Ν ᾽ 
“συγχρησόμεθα ταῖς Νίκαις εἰς τὸν πόλεμον" ov yap 
, \ 1/ oy Y ε ΄ 3 \ 
κατακόπτοντι τὰς Νίκας ἔοικεν οὕτως ῥηθέν, ἀλλὰ ovp- 
μάχους μεταποιοῦντι. 


3. ἐκεῖνος ex ἐκείνως (ut videtur) P: item v. το. 6 ἐξαρθέντες] Spengelius, 
ἐξαιρεθέντες P. 7 Αἰσχίνου : ais in rasura P. | κατηγορία] H. Stephanus, 
κατηγορίας P. 12 #o¥supra versum add. P. 15 οὐκ post καὶ add. Victorius. 
τό ἐπιμόνη P. 17 πλεῖον in πλείων atram. pallid. mut. P. 19 μὲν πέπτω- 
κεν P. 20 lacunam indicavit Victorius. 28, 29 οὐ γὰρ κατακόπτοντι in 
ras. P. 30 μεταποιοῦντι in margine add. P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 195 


ought not, Aeschines, to refrain from holding out your palm 
as a speaker, but to refrain from holding out your palm as an 
ambassador’. 

278. And similarly: ‘Nay, he was appropriating Eu- 
boea?” The object of the rise in tone here is not to make the 
style dignified, but to make it forcible. This occurs when in 
mid-height of our exaltation we are denouncing some opponent. 
So here, Aeschines and Philip are respectively denounced. 

279. In speaking it is sometimes forcible to address 
questions to the audience without disclosing one’s own view. 
For instance: ‘ Nay, he was appropriating Euboea and estab- 
lishing a fortress to command Attica; and in so doing was 
he wronging us and violating the peace, or was he not??’ 
The orator forces his hearer into a sort of corner, so that he 
seems to be brought to task and to have no answer. If the 
positive statement ‘he was wronging us and violating the 
peace’ were substituted, the effect would be that of precise 
information rather than of cross-examination. 

280. The figure called ‘epimone,’ which is a mode of 
expression going beyond the bare statement of fact, will 
contribute very greatly to vigour of style. An example of it 
_may be quoted from Demosthenes: ‘Men of Athens, a terrible 
malady has fallen upon Hellas...*’ [If thus changed], the 
sentence would have been less forcible. 

281. An element of vigour may also be found in what 
is called ‘euphemism, whereby a man makes inauspicious 
things appear auspicious and impious acts appear pious. A 
speaker-once urged that the golden Statues of Victory should 
be melted down, so that the proceeds might be used to prose- 
cute the war. But he did not say outright, ‘Let us cut up 
the Victories for the war.’ Such a proposal would have seemed 
impious and like an insult to the goddesses. He put it in 
the more euphemistic form: ‘We will seek the cooperation of 
the Victories for the war. This expression seems to suggest 
not the cutting up of the Victories, but the conversion of 
them into allies. 

1 Demosth. De Falsa Leg. 421. 2 Demosth. de Cor. 71. 
3 Demosth. de Falsa Leg. 424. 
13—2 


on 


Io 


20 


25 


196 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡΙ EPMHNEIA2 


282. Aewa δὲ Kal τὰ Δημάδεια, καίτοι ἴδιον καὶ 
ἄτοπον τρόπον ἔχειν δοκοῦντα, ἔστι δὲ αὐτῶν ἡ δεινότης 
+ nw > / 4 Ν 5 5 La) 
ἔκ TE TOV ἐμφάσεων γινομένη, καὶ ἐξ ἀλληγορικοῦ τινος 

7 Ν Ων 5 ε “ 
παραλαμβανομένου, καὶ τρίτον ἐξ ὑπερβολῆς. 

283. Οἷόν ἐστι τὸ “οὐ τέθνηκεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος, ὦ 
» 3 A > \ “Ὁ ς- 3 ΄ὕἹ an lowe 
ἄνδρες ᾿Αθηναῖοι: walev yap ἂν ἡ οἰκουμένη τοῦ νεκροῦ. 
Ν Ν \ G 3. ? 3 Ν ὦ ΄, 2. D Ν 
τὸ μὲν yap ᾿“ὠζεν ἀντὶ τοῦ ησθάνετο᾽ ἀλληγορικὸν 

Ν Ὁ Ν ν Ν δὲ Ν 3 ΄ 3 , 
καὶ ὑπερβολικὸν ἅμα, TO δὲ τὴν οἰκουμένην αἰσθάνεσθαι 
A ἢ a “ 
ἐμφαντικὸν τῆς δυνάμεως τῆς ᾿Αλεξάνδρου, καὶ ἅμα δέ τι 
ἐκπληκτικὸν ἔχει ὃ λόγος ἠθροισμένον ἐκ τῶν τριῶν" | 
“ 5 
πᾶσα δὲ ἔκπληξις δεινόν, ἐπειδὴ φοβερόν. 
wn ΄“ 3, ο Lay 

284. Tov δὲ αὐτοῦ εἴδους καὶ τὸ “ὅτι τοῦτο TO ψή- 

φισμα οὐκ ἐγὼ ἔγραψα, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ πόλεμος τῷ ᾿Αλεξάνδρου 
, ΄ ) NE ING Cy, \ ε \ igs 

δόρατι γράφων, Kat τὸ ‘ ἔοικε yap ἡ Μακεδονικὴ δύναμις, 

ἀπολωλεκυΐῖα τὸν ᾿Αλέξανδρον, τῷ Κύκλωπι τετυφλωμένῳ.᾽ 

285. Καὶ ἀλλαχοῦ που, “πόλιν, οὐ τὴν ἐπὶ προ- 

, Ν 4 5 Ν “ ὃ 4 ε ὃ 4 
yovav τὴν ναύμαχον, ἀλλὰ γραῦν, σανδάλια ὑποδεδεμένην 
qn \ Lal lal 
Kal πτισάνην ῥοφῶσαν" TO μὲν yap γραῦν ἀλληγοροῦν 
> \ n° A Ν᾿ Ὁ " NUS, 39 an \ 
ἀντὶ Tov ἀσθενῆ Kai ἐξίτηλον ἤδη, Kal ἅμα ἐμφαῖνον τὴν 
5 4 > la ε A Ν Ν ΄, ε “ 
ἀδρανίαν αὐτῆς ὑπερβολικῶς: τὸ δὲ πτισάνην ῥοφῶσαν, 
ἐπεὶ ἐν κρεανομίαις τότε καὶ πανδαισίαις διάγουσαν 
\ 
ἀπολλύειν TA στρατιωτικὰ χρήματα. 

286. Περὶ μὲν οὖν τῆς Δημαδείου δεινότητος ἀρκεῖ 

τοσαῦτα, καίτοι ἐχούσης τι ἐπισφαλὲς καὶ οὐκ εὐμίμητον 
Lal » 3, 
μάλα: ἔνεστι γάρ τι καὶ ποιητικὸν τῷ εἴδει, εἴ γε ποιη- 

Ν ε 5 ’ὔ Ν ε Ν Ν y+ Ν 
τικὸν ἡ ἀλληγορία καὶ ὑπερβολὴ καὶ ἔμφασις, ποιητικὸν 
δὲ μικτὸν κωμῳδίας. 

287. Τὸ δὲ καλούμενον ἐσχηματισμένον ἐν λόγῳ οἱ 
νῦν ῥήτορες γελοίως ποιοῦσιν καὶ μετὰ ἐμφάσεως ἀγεν- 

1 δημάδης in margine P. | δημάδια Ῥ. 6 ἂν supra versum add. P. 
8 ἅμα in margine add. P. 16 πόλιν] Lhardyus, πάλιν Ρ. 18 ῥοφοῦσαν 
(w supra ov scripto) Ρ. 1g ἐμφαίνον ex ἐμφαίνων P. 20 ὑπερβολικῶς : 
ὑπερ add. m. rec. P. πτισάνην ῥοφῶσαν in margine P. 22 ἀπολλύειν] Victorius, 


ἀπολύειν P. 23 δημαδίου P. 24 ἐπισφαλὲς : es Supra versum add. P. 
25 τὸ Ρ. 20 ἀγεννοῦς ex ἀγενοῦς P. 


244° 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 197 


282. The sayings of Demades, also, though thought to 
have a peculiar, even eccentric character, possess a certain 
force, which they owe to innuendo, to the employment of an 
allegorical element, and (lastly) to hyperbole. 

283. This is an example: ‘ Alexander is not dead, men 
of Athens; or the whole world would have scented the 
corpse’ The use of ‘scented’ in place of ‘perceived,’ is 
allegorical and hyperbolical alike ; and the idea of the whole 
world perceiving it suggests the might of Alexander. Further, 
the words convey a thrilling effect, which is the joint result 
of the three causes. And every such sensation is forcible, 
since it inspires fear. 

284. Of the same character are the words: ‘It was not 
I that wrote this resolution, but the war wrote it with Alex- 
ander’s spear’!; and these; ‘The might of Macedon, after 
losing Alexander, resembles the Cyclops with his blinded 
eyers 

285. And elsewhere: ‘A State, no longer the sea- 
warrior of the days of our ancestors, but a lean and slippered 
crone supping her posset!. Here the expression ‘crone’ is used 
figuratively for a weak and declining State, whose impotence 
it indicates in an exaggerated way. The words ‘supping her 
posset’ imply that the city was occupied with feasts and 
banquets and was squandering the war-funds. 

286. Enough has been said with respect to the Dema- 
dean vigour, which indeed has dangers of its own and is not 
easily copied. There is in its nature something poetical, if 
allegory and hyperbole and innuendo are poetical. But it is 
poetry with a dash of burlesque in it. 

287. Next comes the so-called ‘covert allusion. This 


the orators of our day employ to a ridiculous extent, coupling 


1 Demad. fragmm., Baiter-Sauppe 11. p. 315. 


198 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡΙ EPMHNEIA 


A 9 \ a 3 a > ἈΝ \ A 9 
νοῦς Gua Kal οἷον ἀναμνηστικῆς, ἀληθινὸν δὲ σχῆμά ἐστι 
/ \ Lal 
λόγου μετὰ δυοῖν τούτοιν λεγόμενον, εὐπρεπείας Kal 
ἀσφαλείας. 
288. Εὐπρεπείας μέν, οἷον ὡς Πλάτων ᾿Αρίστιππον 
Ν an 
5 kat Κλεόμβροτον λοιδορῆσαι θελήσας, ἐν Αἰγίνῃ ὀψοφα- 

a ὃ ὃ / Ss ΄ > ΄ > ὰ Ν 
γοῦντας δεδεμένου Σωκράτους ᾿Αθήνησιν ἐπὶ πολλὰς 
ε 4 \ Ν 4 ε Ν ε lal \ 2 
ἡμέρας, καὶ μὴ διαπλεύσαντας ws τὸν ἑταῖρον Kal διδάσ- 
καλον, καίτοι οὐχ ὅλους ἀπέχοντας διακοσίους σταδίους 
τῶν ᾿Αθηνῶν. ταῦτα πάντα διαρρήδην μὲν οὐκ εἶπεν" 

/ Ν > ¢ , 5 lal ΄ὔ΄ / \ 
10 λοιδορία yap ἣν ὁ λόγος: εὐπρεπῶς δέ πως τόνδε τὸν 

΄ 3 Ν \ ε ΄ Ν Ὡ." 
τρόπον. ἐρωτηθεὶς γὰρ ὁ Φαίδων τοὺς παρόντας Σω- 

/ 
κράτῃ, καὶ καταλέξας ἕκαστον, ἐπανερωτηθείς, εἰ καὶ 
> , an 

Aptotummos καὶ Κλεόμβροτος παρῆσαν, ‘ov, φησίν, 
3 > 
“ἐν Αἰγίνῃ yap joa πάντα yap τὰ προειρημένα ἐμ- 

5: , a ¢2 > 7 5 ? \ δ ΄ ε 

15 φαίνεται τῷ “ἐν Αἰγίνῃ Yoav’ καὶ πολὺ δεινότερος ὁ 
λόγος δοκεῖ τοῦ πράγματος αὐτοῦ ἐμφαίνοντος τὸ δεινόν, 
> \ na ΄ N \ > > \ N > , 
οὐχὶ τοῦ λέγοντος. τοὺς μὲν οὖν ἀμφὶ τὸν ᾿Αρίστιππον 
καὶ λοιδορῆσαι ἴσως ἀκινδύνου ὄντος ἐν σχήματι ὃ 
Πλάτων ἐλοιδόρησεν. 

20 289. Πολλάκις δὲ ἢ πρὸς τύραννον ἢ ἄλλως βίαιόν 

,ὔ Ν 3 4 c nw 4 > 
Twa διαλεγόμενοι Kal ὀνειδίσαι ὁρμῶντες χρήζομεν ἐξ 
> vA 4 / ε A ε Ν Ν 
ἀνάγκης σχήματος λόγου, ὡς Δημήτριος ὁ Φαληρεὺς πρὸς 
A Ν ,ὔ 5 Ν an 4 ,ὔ 

Κρατερὸν τὸν Μακεδόνα ἐπὶ χρυσῆς κλίνης καθεζόμενον 
μετέωρον, καὶ ἐν πορφυρᾷ χλανίδι, καὶ ὑπερηφάνως ἀπο- 

Ἐ ΄ N ΄, an ε ΄ ΄ 

25 δεχόμενον τὰς πρεσβείας τῶν Ἑλλήνων, σχηματίσας 
> > on |e ν 63 / ’ὔ 4 
εἶπεν ὀνειδιστικῶς, OTL ᾿ ὑπεδεξάμεθά ποτε πρεσβεύοντας 
ἡμεῖς τούσδε καὶ Κρατερὸν τοῦτον'᾿ ἐν γὰρ τῷ δεικτικῷ 
τῷ “τοῦτον᾽ ἐμφαίνεται ἡ ὑπερηφανία τοῦ Κρατεροῦ 
πᾶσα ὠνειδισμένη ἐν σχήματι. 

I περὶ ἀληθείας in margine Ρ. " διαλύσαντας τὸν ἕτερον, πλεὺ Supra λυ 
et au supra ε(ρ) scripto, P. | ws add. Victorius. 8 ἀπέχοντα P. 13 ἀρί- 
στιπος Ρ. 15 τὸ Ρ. 17 ἀρίστιπον Ῥ. 22 λόγου] Finckhius, ὅλου Ρ. | 
on τί τὸ λεγόμενον ποι (h. 6. ποῖος) Δημήτριος καὶ τίς ὁ τάδε γράφον (leg. γράφων) in 


margine Ρ. 24. χλανίδι, wv supra νι scripto P. 26 εἰπεῖν corr. in εἶπεν 
(accentu non mutato) P. 27 τόνδε P. 28 τὸ τοῦτον P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 199 


it with low, and (so to say) suggestive, innuendo. The true 
‘covert allusion’ depends on two conditions, good taste and 
circumspection. 

288. Good taste is shown in the ‘ Phaedo, where Plato 
desires to reproach Aristippus and Cleombrotus because they 
were feasting at Aegina when Socrates was lying for many 
days imprisoned at Athens, and did not cross to visit their 
friend and master, although they were less than thirty miles 
from Athens?. He has not said all this in express terms (for 
that would have been an open reproach), but with fitting 
reserve as follows. Phaedo is asked who were with Socrates. 
He enumerates the men one by one. Next he is asked 
whether Aristippus and Cleombrotus were present. ‘No,’ he 
answers ; ‘they were in Aegina.’ Everything that precedes 
owes its point to the words ‘they were in Aegina.” The 
passage is all the more forcible because its point is conveyed 
by the fact itself and not by the speaker. So, although he 
might no doubt have reproached Aristippus and his com- 
panions without incurring any risk, Plato has done so under 
cover of a figure. 

289. Often in addressing a despot, or any person other- 
wise ungovernable, we may be driven to employ a figure of 
language if we wish to censure him. Demetrius of Phalerum 
dealt in this way with the Macedonian Craterus who was 
seated aloft on a golden couch, wearing a purple mantle and 
receiving the Greek embassies with haughty pride. Making 
use of a figure, he said tauntingly: ‘We ourselves once re- 
ceived these men as ambassadors together with yon Craterus?.’ 
By the use of the demonstrative yow all the pride of Craterus 
is indicated and rebuked in a figure. 


1 Plat. Phaed. 59 C. 
2 Demetr. Phaler. fragm. 7, C. Miiller Orat. Att. 11. p. 476. 


on 


10 


"- 
σι 


20 


τὸ 
σι 


200 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA 


290. Tov αὐτοῦ εἴδους ἐστὶ καὶ τὸ Πλάτωνος πρὸς 
Διονύσιον ψευσάμενον καὶ ἀρνησάμενον, ὅτι “ἐγώ σοι 
Πλάτων οὐδὲν ὡμολόγησα, σὺ μέντοι, νὴ τοὺς θεούς." 

Ν Ν 5 ΄΄ 5 / Ν » ε / 
καὶ yap ἐλήλεγκται ἐψευσμένος, καὶ ἔχει τι ὁ λόγος 
σχῆμα μεγαλεῖον ἅμα καὶ ἀσφαλές. 

201. Πολλαχῆ μέντοι καὶ  ἐπαμφοτερίζουσιν: οἷς 
ἐοικέναι εἴ τις ἐθέλοι καὶ ψόγους εἰκαιοψόγους εἶναι [θέλοι 

4S \ la > ΄ EN A - aA 
τις], παράδειγμα τὸ τοῦ Αἰσχίνου ἐπὶ τοῦ Τηλαυγοῦς: 
lal \ an 
πᾶσα yap σχεδὸν ἡ περὶ TOY Τηλαυγῆ διήγησις ἀπορίαν 
παρέχοι, εἴτε θαυμασμὸς εἴτε χλευασμός ἐστι. τὸ δὲ 

a > > ΄ ΄ > ΄ > x » 
τοιοῦτον εἶδος ἀμφίβολον, καίτοι εἰρωνεία οὐκ ὃν ἔχει 
τινὰ ὅμως καὶ εἰρωνείας ἔμφασιν. 

292. Δύναιτο δ᾽ ἂν τις καὶ ἑτέρως σχηματίζειν, οἷον 

4 5 Ν 5 lal 5 ΄ὔ ε / Ν ΄ 
οὕτως: ἐπειδὴ ἀηδῶς ἀκούουσιν οἱ δυνάσται καὶ δυνά- 
στιδες τὰ αὑτῶν ἁμαρτήματα, παραινοῦντες αὐτοῖς μὴ 
ε / > 3 3 ΄ὔ 3 la) > 3 yy, Gap. 

ἁμαρτάνειν οὐκ ἐξ εὐθείας ἐροῦμεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἤτοι ἑτέρους 
ψέξομέν τινας τὰ ὅμοια πεποιηκότας, οἷον πρὸς Διονύσιον 
τὸν τύραννον κατὰ Φαλάριδος τοῦ τυράννου ἐροῦμεν καὶ 
lal 4 5 ΄, “δ 9 / ΄ ΄ 
τῆς Φαλάριδος ἀποτομίας: 7) ἐπαινεσόμεθά τινας Διονυσίῳ 
τὰ ἐναντία πεποιηκότας, οἷον Τέλωνα 7 Ἱέρωνα, ὅτι πα- 

΄ D2 las S Wy Ν ὃ ὃ 4 Ν Ν 
τράσιν ἐῴκεσαν τῆς Σικελίας καὶ διδασκάλοις: καὶ γὰρ 

“ 5 4 Ψ Ν 3 /N Ν 
νουθετεῖται ἀκούων ἅμα καὶ οὐ λοιδορεῖται καὶ ζηλο- 
τυπεῖ τῷ Τέλωνι ἐπαινουμένῳ καὶ ἐπαίνου ὀρέγεται καὶ 
οὗτος. 

203. Πολλὰ δὲ τοιαῦτα παρὰ τοῖς τυράννοις, οἷον 
Φίλιππος μὲν διὰ τὸ ἑτερόφθαλμος εἶναι ὠργίζετο, εἴ 

la ο 
τις ὀνομάσειεν ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῦ Κύκλωπα ἢ ὀφθαλμὸν ὅλως: 
ε , 2 ¢ AS , » ΄ " rR 
Ἑρμείας δ᾽ ὁ τοῦ ᾿Αταρνέως ἄρξας, καίτοι τἄλλα πρᾷος, 


32 ὀμολόγησα P. 4 ἐλήλεκται Ρ. 6 πολλαχὴ Ρ. | ἐπαμφοτερή- 
fovow Ῥ. 7 εἰκαιοψόγους} Victorius, εἰ καὶ ὁ ψόγους P. | θέλοι τις seclusi. 
8, 9 τηλαύγοῦς...... τηλαύγῆ P. Io παράσχοι ἂν m. rec. P., παρέχοι P. 
12 elpwvias P. 15 αὑτῶν] Spengelius, αὐτῶν P. | αὐταῖς P. 16 ήτοι P. 
19 φάριδος P. 22 λοιδωρεῖται P. 26 on Ore ἑτερόφθαλμος Φίλιππος ἦν in 


margine P. | ὀργίζετο P. 28 ἑρμίας P. 


244 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 201 


290. Under the same heading comes the reply of Plato 
to Dionysius who had broken a promise and then denied 
having ever made it: ‘It is not I, Plato, who have to you 
made any promise: it is you—by heaven, it is you!” Diony- 
sius is thus convicted of falsehood, while the form of the 
words is at once dignified and circumspect. 

291. Words are often used with an equivocal meaning. 
If anyone wishes to practise this art and to deal in censures 
which seem unintentional hits, he has an example ready to 
his hand in the passage of Aeschines about Telauges. Almost 
the entire account of Telauges will leave one puzzled as to 
whether it is eulogy or satire. This ambiguous way of speak- 
ing, although not irony, yet has a suggestion of irony. 

292. The ‘covert allusion’ may be employed in yet 
another way as follows. Great lords and ladies dislike to 
hear their own faults mentioned. Accordingly, when counsel- 
ling them to refrain from faults, we shall not speak in direct 
terms. We shall, rather, blame some other persons who have 
acted in the same way. For example, in addressing the tyrant 
Dionysius, we shall inveigh against the tyrant Phalaris and 
his cruelty. Or we shall praise individuals who have acted in 
the opposite way to Dionysius, saying of Gelo or Hiero (for 
example) that they were like fathers and educators of Sicily. 
The hearer is admonished without feeling himself censured ; 
he emulates Gelo, the subject of these praises, and covets 
praise for himself. 

293. One has often to exercise such caution in dealing 
with the great. Because he had only one eye, Philip 
would grow angry if anyone spoke of the Cyclops in his 
presence or used the word ‘eye’ at all. Hermeias, the ruler 


of Atarneus, though for the most part of a gentle nature 


1 Cp. Plat. Zfzst. 7, Ὁ. 349 B. 


on 


Io 


20 


30 


202 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA2 


ε / 5 x» 5 4 ε ’ Ν ’ 

ὡς λέγεται, οὐκ ἂν ἠνέσχετο ῥᾳδίως τινὸς μαχαίριον 

5 ὔ wn > 

ὀνομάζοντος ἢ τομὴν 7H ἐκτομὴν διὰ TO εὐνοῦχος εἶναι. 
“ > ΕΣ > An , ᾽ὔ ἊΝ > 

ταῦτα δ᾽ εἴρηκα ἐμφῆναι βουλόμενος μάλιστα τὸ ἦθος 
Ἂν ὃ ͵ὔ ε ,ὔ ΄“ 4 5 ww 

TO δυναστευτικόν, ὡς μάλιστα χρῇζον λόγου ἀσφαλοῦς, 

ἃ ἴων 

ὃς καλεῖται ἐσχηματισμένος. 

2904. Καίτοι πολλάκις καὶ οἱ δῆμοι οἱ μεγάλοι καὶ 
ἰσχυροὶ δέονται τοιούτου εἴδους τῶν λόγων, ὥσπερ οἱ 
τύραννοι, καθάπερ ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων δῆμος, ἄρχων τῆς “Ελλάδος 
καὶ κόλακας τρέφων Κλέωνας καὶ Κλεοφῶντας. τὸ μὲν 

> YA > ΄,ὕ Ν NG) las 3 , ΕΣ 
οὖν κολακεύειν αἰσχρόν, τὸ δὲ ἐπιτιμᾶν ἐπισφαλές, ἄριστον 
δὲ τὸ μεταξύ, TOUT ἔστι τὸ ἐσχηματισμένον. 
r 4 5 Ν Ν ε 4 > / 
295. Kat ποτε αὐτὸν τὸν ἁμαρτάνοντα ἐπαινέσομεν, 
5 Sh) -“ ν 3 > "9}719, ae 5 ε ΄ a Ν 

οὐκ ἐφ᾽ οἷς ἥμαρτεν, ἀλλ᾽ ἐφ᾽ οἷς οὐχ ἡμάρτηκεν, οἷον τὸν 
ὀργιζόμενον, ὅτι χθὲς ἐπῃνεῖτο πρᾷος φανεὶς ἐπὶ τοῖς 
τοῦ δεῖνος ἁμαρτήμασιν, καὶ ὅτι ζηλωτὸς τοῖς πολίταις 
σύνεστιν. ἡδέως γὰρ δὴ ἕκαστος μιμεῖται ἑαυτὸν καὶ 
συνάψαι βούλεται ἐπαίνῳ ἔπαινον, μᾶλλον δ᾽ ἕνα ὁμαλῆ 
ἔπαινον ποιῆσαι. 

296. Καθόλου δὲ ὥσπερ τὸν αὐτὸν κηρὸν ὁ μέν τις 

4 »Ἤ ε Ν “ ε NaS, ν Ν la 
κύνα ἔπλασεν, 6 δὲ βοῦν, ὁ δὲ ἵππον, οὕτω καὶ πρᾶγμα 
ταὐτὸν ὁ μέν τις ἀποφαινόμενος καὶ κατηγορῶν φησιν, 
[2 yy nw 
ὅτι ‘ot ἄνθρωποι χρήματα μὲν ἀπολείπουσι τοῖς παισίν, 
ἐπιστήμην δὲ οὐ συναπολείπουσιν, τὴν χρησομένην τοῖς 
ἀπολειφθεῖσιν" τοῦτο δὲ τὸ εἶδος τοῦ λόγου ᾿Αριστίππειον 


λ / Ψ Ν 5 Ν ε aA / 0 / 
EVET QL: ETEPOS δὲ ταῦυτον ὑποθετικῶς προοισεταιυ, κασαπέερ 


— a \ ΄ a “ ς a. Ν 3 ΄ὕἹ 
Ξενοφῶντος τὰ πολλά, | οἷον ὅτι ‘det γὰρ οὐ χρήματα 
, “ rf “ , 5 Ν Ν 5 4 
μόνον ἀπολιπεῖν τοῖς ἑαυτῶν παισίν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπιστήμην 
Ν “ ᾽ 
ΤῊΝ χρησομένην αὐτοῖς. 
\ , ’΄ > / 
297. To δὲ ἰδίως καλούμενον εἶδος Σωκρατικόν, 
= / an an 3 ΄ XN 4, 
ὃ μάλιστα δοκοῦσιν ζηλῶσαι Αἰσχίνης καὶ Πλάτων, 
7 on ἴῃ margine P. 14 ἐπηνεῖ τὸ P. 22 ὅτι οἱ] edd., ὅτι de Ῥ. 
23, 24 τοῖς ἀπολειφθεῖσιν) Victorius, τοῖς συναπολειφθεῖσιν P. 24 ἀριστίππιον 
ex ἀρίστιππον P. 25 ὑποθετικῶς προοίσεται : ικ et of in ras. P. 27 μὲν 
(punctis tamen superpositis) ante μόνον habet P. 28 αὐτῆς (of supra ἢ scripto) P- 
30 oP. 


245" 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 203 


as it is said, became furious (because he was a eunuch) at 
hearing anybody speak of a ‘surgeon’s knife, of ‘amputa- 
tion, or of ‘excision. I have mentioned these facts out 
of a desire to bring into relief the true character of great 
potentates, and to show that it specially calls for that 
wary form of language which bears the name of ‘covert 
allusion,’ 

294. It must be observed, however, that great and 
powerful populaces no less than despots usually require 
these ceremonious forms of language. An instance in point 
is the Athenian republic, which in the hour of its ascendency 
over Greece, harboured such flatterers as Cleon and Cleophon. 
Flattery no doubt is shameful, while adverse criticism is 
dangerous. It is best to pursue the middle course, that of 
the covert hint. 

295. At times we shall compliment a man who has 
failings not on his failings but on his proved avoidance of them. 
We shall remind an irascible person that yesterday he was 
praised for the indulgence he showed to So-and-So’s errors, 
and that he is a pattern to the citizens among whom he 
moves. Every man gladly takes himself as a model and is 
eager to add praise to praise, or rather to win one uniform 
record of praise. 

296. In fine, it is with language as with a lump of wax, 
out of which one man fashions a dog, another an ox, another 
a horse. One will deal with his subject in the way of 
exposition and asseveration, saying (for example) that ‘men 
leave property to their children, but they do not therewith 
leave the knowledge which will rightly use the legacy’!: a 
way of putting it which is called ‘ Aristippean. Another 
will (as Xenophon commonly does) express the same 
thought in the way of suggestion, e.g. ‘men ought to leave 
not only money to their children, but also the knowledge 
which will use the money rightly.’ 

297. What is specifically called the ‘Socratic’ manner 
—one which seems to have excited the emulation of Aeschines 


1 Scr. Inc. 


Io 


τὸ 
σι 


σι 


σι 


204 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ ΕΡΛΛΗΝΕΙΑΣ 


STEEN τίσ εἴεν ἃ ἂν τοῦτο τὸ πρᾶγμα τὸ DORN pi SEL εἰς 
ἐρώτησιν, ὧδέ πως, οἷον “ὦ παῖ, πόσα σοι χρήματα 
ἀπέλιπεν ὃ πατήρ; ἢ πολλά τινα καὶ οὐκ εὐαρίθμητα; 
πολλά, ὦ Σώκρατες. dpa οὖν καὶ ἐπιστήμην ἀπέλιπέν 
Χ ΄ la y 
σοι τὴν χρησομένην αὐτοῖς; ἅμα yap Kal εἰς ἀπορίαν 
»Ἁ Ν lal ΄ὔ YW 9 ΄ Ψ 3 4 
ἔβαλεν τὸν παῖδα λεληθότως, καὶ ἠνέμνησεν OTL ἀνεπιστή- 
μων ἐστί, καὶ παιδεύεσθαι προετρέψατο: ταῦτα πάντα 
3 las \ 9 = Ν ΞΕ ΑΝ Ν \ ΄ fal > Ν᾽ 
ἠθικῶς καὶ ἐμμελῶς, καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ τὸ λεγόμενον τοῦτο ἀπὸ 
Σκυθῶν. 
298. Εὐημέρησαν δ᾽ οἱ τοιοῦτοι λόγοι τότε ἐξευρε- 
θέντες τὸ πρῶτον, μᾶλλον δὲ ἐξέπλη ἕξαν τῷ D καὶ 
ς ρ » [a ἐξέπληξαν τῷ TE μιμητικῷ καὶ 
τῷ ἐναργεῖ καὶ τῷ μετὰ μεγαλοφροσύνης νουθετικῷ. περὶ 
μὲν δὴ πλάσματος λόγου καὶ σχηματισμῶν ἀρκείτω ταῦτα. 
ε Ν 4 ε \ \ 4 ν ΄ 
299. Η δὲ λειότης ἢ περι τὴν σύνθεσιν, οιᾳ κε- 
4 ε 3 > > 4 4 \ 
χρηνται μάλιστα ot ἀπ᾽ ᾿Ισοκράτους, φυλαξάμενοι τὴν 
σύγκρουσιν τῶν φωνηέντων γραμμάτων, οὐ μάλα ἐπιτηδεία 
5 Ν ὃ Lo λ ΄ὔ 3 λλὰ Ν δ Ἢ > aA Ν ἥς “Ὁ 
ἐστὶ δεινῷ λόγῳ: πολλὰ γὰρ [τὰ ἐκ τῆς συμπλήξεως ἂν 
αὐτῆς γένοιτο δεινότερα, οἷον “τοῦ γὰρ Φωκικοῦ συ- 
\ y 
στάντος πολέμου, OV OL ἐμέ, OV yap ἔγωγε ἐπολιτευόμην 
’, ? > Ν , Ν ΄ “"» » 
πω τότε. εἰ δὲ μεταβαλών τις καὶ συνάψας ὧδ᾽ εἴποι: 
“τοῦ πολέμου γὰρ οὐ du ἐμὲ τοῦ Φωκικοῦ συστάντος: 
5 Ν > / A / / ) > > 7 ὃ la 
ov yap ἐπολιτευόμην ἔγωγέ πω τότε, οὐκ ὀλίγον διεξαιρή- 
σει τῆς δεινότητος, ἐπεὶ πολλαχοῦ καὶ τὸ ἠχῶδες τῆς 
συγκρούσεως ἴσως ἔσται δεινότερον. 
Ν Ν ΝΝ > ,ὔ 3 Ν Ν Ν ν 
300. Καὶ yap το αφρόντιστον αὐτὸ και TO WOTTEP 
΄ ΄ Χ 
αὐτοφυὲς δεινότητα παραστήσει τινά, μάλιστα ἐπὰν ὀρ- 
, 3 22 ε \ DY ro 4 ε δὲ ἊΝ 
γιζομένους ἐμφαίνωμεν αὑτοὺς ἢ ἠδικημένους. ἢ OE περὶ 
Ν ,, Ν ε 4 Ν 3 5 ΄ DON \ 
τὴν λειότητα Kal ἁρμονίαν φροντὶς οὐκ ὀργιζομένου, ἀλλὰ 
vA /, > Ν 3 / aA 
παίζοντός ἐστι καὶ ἐπιδεικνυμένου μᾶλλον. 

I μεταρυθμίσειεν ἂν] Schneiderus, μεταῥυθμήσειαν P. | πράγμα Ρ. 3 ἀπέ- 
λειπεν Ῥ. | οὐκ supra versum scripsit P. 10 εὐημέρισαν P. 11 μιμητικῷ] 
Galeus, τιμητικῶ P. [4 πέρὶ λειότητος titulus in P. | ofa P. | κέχρηται, ν supra 
versum scripto, P. 15 ἰσωκράτους P. 17 τὰ secl. Spengelius. 20 πω 


τότε] edd. c. codd. Demosth., πώποτε P. 22 πω τότε] edd., πώποτε P. | δὶ 
ἐξαιρήσει P. 25 αὐτὸς (s punctis notato) P. 27 αὐτοὺς P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 205 


and Plato in no common degree—would recast the foregoing 
proposition in an interrogative form, somewhat as follows. 
‘My dear lad, how much property has your father left you ? 
Is it considerable and not easily assessed? It is considerable, 
Socrates. Well now, has he also left you the knowledge 
which will use it rightly?’ In this way Socrates insensibly 
drives the lad into a corner; he reminds him that he is 
ignorant; he urges him to get instruction. And all this 
naturally and in perfect taste, and with an entire absence 
of what is proverbially known as ‘ Gothic bluntness.’ 

298. Such dialogues met with great success in the days 
of their first invention, or rather they took society by storm 
through their verisimilitude, their vividness, their nobly di- 
dactic character—With regard to artificial speech and the 
employment of figures, this treatment must suffice. 

299. Smoothness of composition (such as is employed 
particularly by the followers of Isocrates, who avoid the 
concurrence of vowels) is not altogether suited to forcible 
language. In many cases greater force will result from an 
actual clashing, e.g. ‘when the Phocian war broke out origi- 
nally, owing not to me, as I was not then engaged in public 
life’ If you were to rearrange the words and fit them 
together thus?: ‘when through no fault of mine the conflict 
began in the Phocian War, since I was not then engaged in 
public life,” you would rob them of a good part of their force, 
since in many passages even the jingle of clashing vowels 
may be held to make a sentence more forcible. 

300. The fact is that words which are actually unpre- 
meditated, and are as it were a spontaneous growth, will give 
an impression of vigour, especially when we are venting our 
anger or our sense of injustice. Whereas anxious attention to 
niceties of smoothness and harmony does not betoken anger so 
much as elegant trifling and a desire to exhibit one’s powers. 

1 Demosth. de Cor. 18. 


2 Sc. in such a way as to remove the various instances of hiatus: πολέμου, oo — 
ἐμέ, ov—éywye ἐπολιτευόμην : imitated in the English version. 


Io 


μι 
σι 


20 


τὸ 
on 


206 AHMHTPIOY ΠΕΡῚ EPMHNEIA> 


ἔν ἴων 

301. Καὶ ὥσπερ τὸ διαλελυμένον σχῆμα δεινότητα 

“ ε 1) ν 4 ε 4 9 
ποιεῖ, WS προλέλεκται, οὕτω ποιήσει ἢ διαλελυμένη ὅλως 

’ “A \ \ A ε ᾽ὔ wn 
σύνθεσις. σημεῖον δὲ καὶ τὸ Ἱππώνακτος. λοιδορῆσαι 

Ν , Ν 3 Ν 4 \ / \ 
yap βουλόμενος τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ἔθραυσεν τὸ μέτρον, καὶ 
> / \ > Ν 53 , Ν » ΄ / 
ἐποίησεν χωλὸν ἀντὶ εὐθέος, καὶ ἀρυθμον, τουτέστι δεινό- 
T τ 4 K Ν δ ὃ 4 J Ἂ \ 4 θ Ν Sy 7) 

NTL πρέπον καὶ λοιδορίᾳ: τὸ γὰρ ἐρρυθμον καὶ εὐήκοον 
ἐγκωμίοις ἂν πρέποι μᾶλλον ἣ ψόγοις. τοσαῦτα καὶ περὶ 
συγκρούσεως. 

΄ ΄ Ν - a A ε 

302. ΠῈαρακειται δέ τις και τῳ δεινῷ χαρακτήρι, ὡς 
τὸ εἰκός, διημαρτημένος καὶ αὐτός, καλεῖται δὲ ἄχαρις. 
γίνεται δὲ ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν, ἐπάν τις αἰσχρὰ καὶ δύσρητα 
5 Ν ΄ 4 ε nw /? na 
ἀναφανδὸν λέγῃ, καθάπερ ὁ τῆς Τιμάνδρας κατηγορῶν 
ε 4 δ 4 \ Ν 5 Ν Ν \ 
ὡς πεπορνευκυίας THY λεκανίδα καὶ τοὺς ὀβολοὺς καὶ THD | 

7 Ν 4 4 4 4 
ψίαθον καὶ πολλήν τινα τοιαύτην δυσφημίαν κατήρασεν 
τοῦ δικαστηρίου. 

QO, ΤΠ σύνθεσις δὲ ἵυπίσετοι: ἄχαρις, ἐὰν διεσπασ- 
oa ἐμφερὴς ἦ, eal ττεῦ ὁ εἰπών, “οὑτωσὶ δ᾽ ἔχον τὸ 
καὶ τό, κτεῖναι. καὶ ἐπὰν τὰ κῶλα μηδεμίαν ἔχῃ πρὸς 
ἄλληλα σύνδεσιν, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμοια διερρηγμένοις. καὶ αἱ 
περίοδοι δὲ αἱ συνεχεῖς καὶ μακραὶ καὶ ἀποπνίγουσαι 

Ν 4 5 4 4 9 \ Ν 5 ΄ 
τοὺς λέγοντας οὐ μόνον κατακορές, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀτερπές. 

304. Τῇ δὲ ὀνομασίᾳ πολλάκις χαρίεντα πράγματα 
» 9 / ͵ὕ ΄ὔ ε σ 7 Ν 
ὄντα ἀτερπέστερα φαίνεται, καθάπερ ὁ Κλείταρχος περὶ 

ia) 4 4 4 4 5 4 ς / 
τῆς τενθρηδόνος λέγων, ζώου μελίσσῃ ἐοικότος: ‘ κατανέ- 

4 ᾳ) 2 « ἊΝ > 4 > 7 \ > Ν 

μεται μέν, φησί, “τὴν ὀρεινήν, εἰσίπταται δὲ εἰς τὰς 
΄ὕ lal 5 ν Ν Ν 5 » EN a> ᾽,ὔ 

κοίλας δρῦς. ὥσπερ περὶ βοὸς ἀγρίου ἣ τοῦ ᾿Βρυμανθίου 

a ΄ 3 3 5 Ν Ν ΄ὔ ,ὔ ν Ν 

κάπρου λέγων, ἀλλ οὐχὶ περὶ μελίσσης τινός, ὥστε καὶ 

ἄχαριν τὸν λόγον ἅμα καὶ ψυχρὸν γενέσθαι. παράκειται 

͵΄ 5 4 nw > 4 
δέ πως ἀλλήλοις ταῦτα ἀμφότερα. 


5 εὐθέος] Victorius, εὐθέως P. 7 πρέπει P. Io ἀχάρις P, ἄχαρις 
χαρακτὴρ in margine P. 12 καθάπερ ὅτι ἂν τῆς τημάνδρας P. | supra κατ aliquid 
erasum est: fort. ἑταιρῶν. 17 οὕτως 16’ ἔχων τὸ κτὸ κτεῖναι P. 22 τῇ δὲ 
évouacia] Victorius, 7 δὲ ὀνομασία P. 24 τενθριδόνος P. | μελίσσῃ : fin ras. P. 
26 κύλας Ρ. 

Δημητρίου περὶ ἑρμηνείας subscriptio in P. 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 207 


301. It has already been said that the figure of dis- 
connected speech has a forcible effect. The same may now 
be said of disconnected composition generally. Hipponax is 
a case in point. In his desire to assail his enemies, he 
shattered his verse, and caused it to limp instead of walking 
erect. By destroying the rhythm, he made the measure 
suitable for energetic invective, since correct and melodious 
rhythm would be fitter for eulogy than for satire—Thus 
much with regard to the collision of vowels. 

302. Side by side with the forcible style there is found, 
as might be expected, a corresponding faulty style, called 
‘the repulsive. It occurs in the subject-matter when a 
speaker mentions publicly things which are disgusting and 
defile the lips. The man, for instance, who accused Ti- 
mandra of having lived a wanton life, bespattered the court 
with a description of her basin, her obols, her mat, and many 
other such unsavoury details? 

303. Composition has a repellent effect, if it seems 
disjointed, as (for example) ‘this and that being thus, death? 
So, too, when the members are in no way linked to one 
another, but resemble fragmentary pieces. And long, con- 
tinuous periods which run the speaker out of breath cause 
not only satiety but also disgust. 

304. Often objects which are themselves full of charm 
lose their attractiveness owing to the choice of words. 
Cleitarchus, for instance, when describing the wasp, an 
insect like a bee, says: ‘It lays waste the hill-country, and 
dashes into the hollow oaks?” This might have served for a 
description of some wild ox, or of the Erymanthian boar, 
rather than of a species of bee. The result is that the passage 
is both repellent and frigid. And in a way these two defects 
are close neighbours. 


1 Ser, Inc. 
2 Clitarch. Fragm. 


Sick 10] τἰχ3 1 11 


πα ΑατοΣ ἐς τι , este ee 5 
- - miele ad o ara, = 
A Σ : ~ x . ------ 95. ΄-“ 


IeraNnrvd) 2 hordit ww ye —wdor 


grains lobd bdo b chon νωννζολοση 32 on ieg ice Wor 
9 96 daly Saag dpdgt dq tnt bo ἡ ραν gen tml ἡ 


οφιανενήσαοῳ ον, hide νων ας apreamsey νον δον οὐ τς 
“Ὁ mA bb ore δέοι, ον, 


WE 2k Te, 


The text of this edition is based on a new collation, made by 
the editor, of the folia (226. 2457) of P 1741 which contain the 
De Llocutione. This famous codex (preserved in the Bibliotheque 
Nationale) is well known to be a veritable treasure-house of Greek 
literary criticism, containing as it does, not only the De L/ocutione 
and several works of minor rhetoricians, but also 


Aristotle’s Rhetoric ; 

Aristotle’s Poetics ; 

Dionys. Halic. de Compositione Verborum ; 
Dionys. Halic. Zp. ad Amm. τι, De Vet. Ser., etc. 


The date of P 1741 is given by M. Henri Omont as the roth or 
the 11th century (Wotice sur le manuscrit grec 1741 de la Bibliotheque 
LVationale p. vii: prefixed to the facsimile of the Poe¢zcs published in 
L. Clédat’s Collection de reproductions de manuscrits). While Omont 
has the /oe¢ics principally in mind when describing the manuscript, 
Roemer (Avistotelis Ars Rhetorica®, pp. v ff.) views it with special 
reference to the Rhetoric, and Usener (De Dionysit Halicarnassensis 
Libris Manuscriptis pp. iv ἢ, and Usener-Radermacher Déonysiz 
Halicarnaset Opuscula 1 pp. vii ff.: cp. also L. Cohn in P/ilologus 
XLIX pp. 390 ἢ, Handschriftliches su Dionys von Halkarnass) with 
special reference to the works of Dionysius. No separate study of 
the part of P 1741 which contains the De L/ocutione has recently 
appeared, with the exception of H. Schenkl’s very valuable paper 
entitled Zur Kritik der Schrift des Demetrios περὶ “Epynvetas (in 
Wiener Studien 1v pp. 55—76). Spengel in his text (/hetores 
Graeci vol. 111: Leipzig, 1856) used the collation made long before 
by Victorius. Wonderfully well as this, like all his work, was accom- 
plished by Victorius, a fuller record of the readings of so important 
a manuscript seems desirable. The almost exhaustive catalogue here 


R. 14 


210 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


given of the errors, and corrections, found in P tends only to confirm 
the respect generally felt for the manuscript, and to show the causes 
(e.g. 1tacism, absence of ὁ subscr. and rarity of « adscr., confusion of 
o and w) of many easily remediable mistakes. And occasionally an 
important form not hitherto observed (e.g. ἀπεκατέστησεν ὃ τοῦ, 
ἠνέμνησεν ὃ 297) emerges to prove that some things recently learnt 
from papyri might also have been learnt from existing mss. The 
marginalia, likewise, are of considerable interest. ‘The headings also 
are interesting ; but they are better printed in the critical footnotes 
than in the body of the text, since they are often inappropriate, mis- 
placed, or inadequate, and cannot be regarded as the work of the 
author himself. 

Schenkl’s paper raises the important question of the value of the 
numerous corrections or alterations found in P. The great majority 
of these are written either in the original hand or in one almost 
equally early and not easily to be distinguished from it; and it seems, 
therefore, better to indicate them by some formula (e.g. the con- 
venient ex) which simply calls attention to the change, than by any pre- 
carious attempt systematically to distinguish between different hands, 
except indeed in the comparatively rare cases where a clearly later 
hand appears and has to be denoted by saz. vec. or by a reference to 
the character of the ink. The corrections seem to depend partly on 
a more accurate re-reading of the original manuscript, partly on the 
use of an equally valuable one representing a somewhat different 
tradition ; and a general review shows that the text is usually altered 
for the better. Many obvious blunders (such as those afterwards 
rectified by Victorius) are, indeed, left untouched; but this fact seems 
to render it the more probable that the corrections actually made 
have manuscript authority behind them and are not due to the mere 
conjecture of some revising scribe. 

The remaining manuscripts (fifteen, or more, in number) of the 
De Elocutione are of late date, belonging chiefly to the 15th century ; 
a list of them will be found in the Praefatio prefixed by Usener to 
Dionysit Halicarnasei Opuscula 1 pp. vil, 1x (cp. Walz, LRhetores 
Graect, vol. 1X pp. 1x—xi). They are all derived from P 1741, the 
better readings they present pointing rather to individual emendation 
than to difference of descent. To Usener’s list should be added a 
15th or 16th century MS. containing the z. épu. which is preserved at 
Queens’ College, Cambridge, and on. which the Librarian of the 
College, Mr F. G. Plaistowe, has kindly sent a report at my request. 


ΖΕΣΧ 211 


The manuscript in question belonged, in 1583, to Henry Hastings, 
Earl of Huntingdon, whose autograph appears on the first leaf, and 
who appears to have given it to his tutor Thomas Church. Church 
left it to Queens’ College at his death, in or about 1606. Besides 
the π᾿ ἕρμ., it contains the dvs Rheforica attributed to Dionysius 
of Halicarnassus, Alexander περὶ σχημάτων, Menandri Rhetoris 
Διαίρεσις, Aristides περὶ τεχνῶν ῥητορικῶν, Apsinis τέχνη ῥητορική and 
περὶ προοιμίου. Though the identification is not free from difficulty, 
it would seem, from the readings communicated to me, that this 
manuscript is the same as Thomas Gale’s ‘Codex Cantabrigiensis.’ 
On pp. 254, 255 of his edition Gale transcribes an Ordo (‘Ordo 
capitum libelli de Lnterpretatione, sive de Elocutione, ex Codice ms. 
Col. Reginalis apud Cantabrigienses’) which tallies with that of the 
Queens’ Ms., except that in the latter, between 1 and 2 of Gale’s list, 
the heading περὶ ὁμοιοτελεύτων is found. It may be added that 
there appears to be no Ms. of the π. épu. in the Gale Collection in 
the Library of Trinity College, Cambridge; and the Bodleian ms. 
(Misc. 230: ms. Auct. T. 3. 13) which contains the treatise is a 
15th century manuscript which belonged to Giovanni Saibante of 
Verona in 1732 and was bought in 1820 by the Bodleian. This 
Ms. has συνεργοῖεν in ὃ 29, not συνεργεῖ which Gale quotes from 
“Cod. Cant.’ 

It has not been thought necessary to record in the critical foot- 
notes the readings of these later manuscripts, partly because of the 
acknowledged pre-eminence of P, and partly because any such report 
must depend, almost entirely, on the loose statements of early editors. 
But it should be borne in mind that, where a reading is in this 
edition attributed to Victorius or to the early editors in general 
(‘edd.’), it may often have the support of one or more of the later 
manuscripts: e.g. pp. 106, 10; 118, 11 and 12; 190, 13; 136, 24; 
106, 21; 132, 6; 96, 8; 116, 16 (cod. Morel.); 188, 4 (cod. Morel.); 
192, 25 (cod. Cantabr.). 

For the Title of the Treatise as given in P 1741, reference may be 
made to the Introduction, p. 61 supra. 


14-2 


NOMES: 


The references are usually made to lines and sections of the text as above 
printed, e.g. 66 7 (=p. 661. 7). When a section of the treatise is quoted, it is 
indicated by the symbol §. The Notes are as few and as brief as possible, in view 
of the Translation and Glossary. 


66 7 ἡμιμέτροις : οἷον ἢ διμέτροις Muretus, ἢ τριμέτροις (Spengel 
Rhet. Gr. wip. 12). 6614 Hecataeus: π. ὕψ. p. 226. Cp. ὃ 12 
infra. 66 19, 20 For xe¢p=‘arm,’ cp. Herod. 11 121 ἀποταμόντα ἐν 
τῷ ὦμῳ τὴν χεῖρα. P’s πήχεις may, however, point to some corruption: 
perhaps of ὄνυχες. It seems unlikely that, in this context, χεὶρ would 
be used in its less usual sense, or that δάκτυλοι and πῆχυς would 
proceed in the order of minor to major. 


68 7 ὁλοκληρία appears to be a late word: Lxx., Plutarch, Diog. 
Laert., Lucian. The adj. ὁλόκληρος (ὃ 2), however, occurs earlier. 
Cp. Introduction p. 56. συμπεραιοῦν (66 18) is also late: Philo, 
Clem. Alex., etc. 


68 20 The passage of the Aphorisms (1 1) runs as follows: 6 
Bios βραχύς, ἡ δὲ τέχνη μακρά, ὃ δὲ καιρὸς ὀξύς, ἡ δὲ πεῖρα σφαλερά, ἡ 
δὲ κρίσις χαλεπή. δεῖ δὲ οὐ μόνον ἑαυτὸν παρέχειν τὰ δέοντα ποιεῦντα, 
ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν νοσέοντα, καὶ τοὺς παρεόντας, καὶ τὰ ἔξωθεν (Littré, who 
translates: “La vie est courte, l’art est long, l'occasion fugitive, 
Vexpérience trompeuse, le jugement difficile. Il faut non seulement 
faire sol-méme ce qui convient, mais encore faire que le malade, les 
assistants et les choses extérieures y concourent”). For the clauses 
here in question see ὃ 238 and Norden’s Kunstprosa 1 pp. 21, 22; 
also Croiset Lztt. Grecgue 1v 189 for the style of Hippocrates in 
general. 68 21, 22 Schneider proposed κατακεκομμένῃ and κεκερ- 
ματισμένῃ, which palaeographically would be hardly a change at all, 
apart from the corresponding alteration of εὐκαταφρόνητος which it 
seems to entail. 


NOTES 213 


70 τ The reading of P, γράψει ἐν, is probably due to a desire 
to supply a preposition, without regard to the fact that ἂν has 
preceded. 

70 13, 14 οὗτος δ᾽ ἦν καλὸς μέν, μέγας δ᾽ ov is the reading found 
in our manuscripts of Xenophon. ‘The author of the z. ἑρμ. is often 
loose in his quotations, relying as he appears to do on his memory ; 
but it is to be noticed that in § 121, as well as here, he has the δέ 
at the end of the clause, and comments on its position. Norden 
(Kunstprosa 1 102 n. 1) expresses his agreement with Demetrius on 
the main point. 


70 19 ὁ λεγόμενος ψυχρός : χαρακτὴρ has commonly been under- 
stood, if not inserted in the text. But λεγόμενος seems to indicate an 
unfamiliar term ; and not ψυχρός but κακόζηλος (δ 239) was the novel 
expression in the author's time. If, however, ψυχρὸς were applied 
(on some such principle as that expounded in § 86) to person rather 
than to style, it might be qualified by λεγόμενος. Cp. π. vy. XXVIII 
ἐψύχετο yap κτλ. For the use of ἐγίγνετο, cp. ὃ 102. 


70 23 βραχυλόγοι: cp. what is (metrically, or semi-metrically) 
said of the Lacedaemonians in Thucyd. tv 17 [ἐπιχώριον ὃν ἡμῖν] οὗ 
μὲν βραχεῖς ἀρκῶσι μὴ πολλοῖς χρῆσθαι. 


70 25 μονοσύλλαβος late: Dionys. Halic., Dionys. Thrax, 
Hermogenes, etc.—Erasmus in his Adagia (vol. 11 p. 803, in the 
Leyden edition of his Works) includes the proverb ‘omnis herus 
servo monosyllabus,’ but only as a translation of the present passage. 
The existence of an original Latin proverb to this effect might have 
some bearing on the question of the date of the z. ἑρμ. 


70 26—28 Possibly this sentence is an interpolation. The 
abrupt asyndeton ai Arai excites suspicion, notwithstanding the 
fact that the author of 7. ἑρμ. sometimes (e.g. p. 74 1. 6 and 1]. 22, 
p. 116 1. 13) omits the copula in his desire for brevity; and the 
interpretation of Homer is very strange. There are, however, other 
indications that the author was given to ‘allegory,’ for which see 
Jebb’s Zxtroduction to Homer p. 89. The explanation offered of the 
same passage of Homer by a scholiast is: xwAat μὲν διὰ τὸ μόγις εἰς 
δεήσεις ἔρχεσθαι" ῥυσσαὶ δὲ διὰ τὸ σκυθρωπιάζειν: παραβλῶπες δέ, ὅτι 
παριδόντες τι τῶν ἀναγκαίων παρακαλοῦμεν ὕστερον. As Dr Leaf says 
in his note ad /oc., the epithets are transferred from the attitude of the 
suppliant to his prayers. 


214 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


70 30 For the proverbs here and elsewhere in the treatise, see 
the short excursus headed ‘ Proverbs in the De Elocutione.’ 


72 21 P's correction ἔστιν γὰρ 7 is in a very old, if not the 
original, hand. As yap is appropriate and 7 is almost indispensable, 
it seems better to adopt this reading than to make any conjectural 
restoration. 


72 25 The meaning of τοῦ παιδὸς εἵνεκα τοῦ Χαβρίου is discussed 
by Blass in-Wewe Jahrbiicher fiir Classische Philologie xxxi 717— 
720. The author of the 7. ἑρμ. seems to have taken the meaning to 
be ‘son’ rather than ‘servant’: cp. § 11. 


74 6 κυκλοειδέσι : late,—Plutarch, Athenaeus etc. (But in 
Athenaeus, vil 328 D, it seems to be part of a quotation from 
Euthydemus, a medical writer of the second century B.c.) 


74 9 Victorius reads μενεῖ in place of μένει. There is point, 
however, in the opposition of the present μένει and the future 


» 
εσται. 


74 τὴ ῥητῶν, the reading of P, is possibly due to the use of 
some compendium for ῥητορειῶν. Roemer (Avistot. Ars Rhetorica 
p. Xxvil) notices the confusion of ῥητορείας and ῥητορικῆς in Aristot. 
Rhet. 1 2. Here Spengel retains ῥητῶν, but suggests (Pracfatio, 
Py xdl) ethateton ὅλαι....... εἰσίν, should be written ὅλη... ἐστί.---Τ is 
worth notice, as perhaps confirming the explanation suggested above, 
that in P there is a small space (not an erasure) immediately after 
ῥητών. 

74 τὸ διά: see note referring to p. 152 1. 7. 

74 19 ἥπερ after comparatives: cp. n. referring to p. 110 |. 19 
infra. 

74 20 Transcribed by Gregorius Corinthius (Walz, het. Gr. 
VII 1215, 1216) with a number of variants which usually seem due 
rather to paraphrase or loose citation than to differences of reading: 
e.g. ὅθεν καὶ τὴν τοιαύτην ἑρμηνείαν οἱ παλαιοὶ διῃρημένην ὠνόμαζον" 
ὡς τὰ πλεῖστα ἔχει τῶν Ἣ ροδότου, καὶ ὡς ἡ Ἑκαταίου ἔχει ἱστορία, καὶ 
ὅλη ἡ ἀρχαία. παράδειγμα δὲ αὐτῆς “Ἑκαταῖος Μιλήσιος ὧδε μυθεῖται" 
τάδε γράφω, ws μοι δοκεῖ ἀληθέα εἶναι, οἱ γὰρ Ἑλλήνων λόγοι πολλοί τε 
καὶ γελοῖοι καὶ ἐμοὶ φαίνονται καὶ εἰσίν. ὁρᾷς ὅτι σεσωρευμένοις ἐπ᾽ 
ἀλλήλοις, κτλ. 

74 27 ἔχουσιν, dat. plur. of the participle: not, as has been 
supposed, third person plural present indicative. 


NOTES 215 


74 30 For the analogies drawn by the Greek rhetoricians from 
various fields of art, cp. D. H/. p. 202. 


76 2 συγκειμένοις : cp. the use of συντιθεμένων in Dionys. Hal. 

de Comp. Verb. c. 22 τραχείαις τε χρῆσθαι πολλαχῇ Kal ἀντιτύποις ταῖς 
A 3QX 3! a tal > “ ε ,ὔ / ‘a / 

συμβολαῖς οὐδὲν αὐτῇ (SC. TH αὐστηρᾷ ἁρμονίᾳ) διαφέρει, οἷον γίνονται 

τῶν λογάδην συντιθεμένων ἐν οἰκοδομίαις λίθων αἱ μήτε εὐγώνιοι μήτε 


΄ / 3 Ν ΄ XN > ΄ 
συνεξεσμέναι βάσεις, αργαι δέ τινες και αὐτοσχέδιοι. 


76 3—7 For this fine and suggestive comparison, see Sandys 
Orator of Cicero p. \xxii n. 5; Blass Griechische Beredsamkeit pp. 
224, 225; Chaignet Za Rhétorique et son Histoire p. 449. 


76 8—13 The view here maintained (with strong personal 
emphasis, δοκιμάζω yap δὴ ἔγωγε) is clearly right,—there should be a 
happy combination of the periodic and the looser structure. Some 
of the longer passages of Shakespeare’s prose will be found to illus- 
trate the point. Cp. Sir Richard Jebb’s lecture on Wacaulay pp. 46, 
47: ‘‘This oratorical character of Macaulay’s style may be illustrated 
by one of its most salient and familiar traits: I mean, his habit of 
placing very short sentences between his longer periods...... Take the 
speeches of almost any great orator, and you will find a similar, 
though perhaps less abundant, use of short sentences, in alternation 
with long periods. Such short sentences are not merely pauses for 
breath; they are not merely deliberate efforts to vary the rhythm 
and arrest the ear: they are dictated, if one may say so, by the 
oratorical instinct; such alternations of the long and the short sentence 
correspond with a certain surging and subsidence of thought and 
feeling in the orator’s mind.” 


76 15, τό Cp. 7. ὕψ. Cc. 41 οὕτως καὶ τὰ κατερρυθμισμένα τῶν 
λεγομένων οὐ τὸ τοῦ λόγου παθος ἐνδίδωσι τοῖς ἀκούουσι, τὸ δὲ τοῦ 
ε ἴω ε ἐν Ζ) 4 Ν > / ΄ 3 Ν ε 
ῥυθμοῦ, ὡς ἐνίοτε προειδότας τὰς ὀφειλομένας καταλήξεις αὐτοὺς ὑπο- 
κρούειν τοῖς λέγουσι καὶ φθάνοντας ὡς ἐν χορῷ τινι προαποδιδόναι τὴν 
Baow.—Attention may be called to the verb ναυτιᾶν in this passage 
of the π᾿ épu. as being specifically Attic. προαναβοᾶν is also of 
interest as occurring only here in extant Greek literature. 


76 23, 24 Aristot. Ahez. 111 9, 2 ἡ μὲν οὖν εἰρομένη λέξις ἡ ἀρχαία 
ἐστίν: “Ἡροδότου Θουρίου ἥδ᾽ ἱστορίης ἀπόδειξις "᾿ ταύτῃ yap πρότερον 
μὲν ἅπαντες, νῦν δὲ οὐ πολλοὶ χρῶνται. In this quotation the π. ἑρμ. 
comes nearer than the heforic to the reading (whether right or 
wrong) found in extant manuscripts of Herodotus. 


216 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


76 24, 25 For φώς in this connexion, cp. 7. ty. Cc. 30 φώς yap τῷ 
ὄντι ἴδιον τοῦ νοῦ τὰ καλὰ ὀνόματα. Here and elsewhere a quotation 
which the editor is unable to assign to its author has been marked 
‘Scr(iptor) Inc(ertus),’ in the hope that others may be able to supply 
the reference. (Can this particular sentence be drawn from the περὶ 
Λέξεως of Theophrastus ?) Some of the sentences thus marked (e.g. 
p- 90 1]. 28) may possibly be examples invented by the author himself ; 
others are no doubt drawn from works now lost. 


78 τ εἰ δὲ μή: this is one of the many cases in which the 
‘correction’ seems clearly preferable to the original reading in P. 
Palaeographically the change is of the slightest, and it is probably of 
the same age as the manuscript. 


78 17—20 ‘The meaning is that what English writers on com- 
position have called the ‘ principle of suspense’ is duly observed. 


78 21 The period of dialogue (as distinguished from the 
historical which is rounded to a certain extent, and the rhetorical 
which is close-knit) is ‘still in the loose or undress state’ of ordinary 
conversation. Goeller would supply or insert μᾶλλον ; but, granted 
that this word may have fallen out after the last two syllables of 
ἀνειμένη, its insertion would hardly give a satisfactory sense, since 
the περίοδος ἱστορικὴ has been described in ὃ 19 as μήτ᾽ ἀνειμένη 
σφόδρα. ' 

80 2,5 Quoted also (more correctly and fully) as an example of 
antithesis in Aristot. Fez. 11 9, 7 πλεῦσαι μὲν διὰ τῆς yrelpov, 
πεζεῦσαι δὲ διὰ τῆς θαλάττης, τὸν μὲν Ῥλλήσποντον ζεύξας, τὸν δ᾽ Ἄθω 
διορύξας. The passage also occurs in the (almost certainly spurious) 
funeral oration attributed to Lysias; and Cicero has translated, or 
imitated, it in the De Finibus 11 34,112, “ Ut si Xerxes, cum tantis 
classibus tantisque equestribus et pedestribus cops, Hellesponto 
iuncto, Athone perfosso, maria ambulavisset terramque navigasset.” 


80 18, το Aristot. Ret. 11 9, 10 εἰσὶν δὲ καὶ ψευδεῖς ἀντιθέσεις, 
οἷον καὶ “Emixappos ἐποίει, “τόκα μὲν ἐν τήνων ἐγὼν ἦν, τόκα δὲ παρὰ 
τήνοις ἐγών. Probably the author of the π. épy. is right in finding 
parody in the words of Epicharmus; so Norden Kwnstprosa 1 25 
n. 2. Blass, however, maintains that there is a true antithesis in 
THVOV...... τήνοις, and that exception can only be taken to éyur...... 
éyov.—Epicharmus is, it may be added, very seldom mentioned in 
the late rhetorical writers. 


NOTES BiG] 


80 26 Also quoted in Aristot. Ret. 11 9, 9; the same passage 
of Homer has already been referred to in § 7. 


821 A late hand in P corrects ὥσπερ into ὥσπα (1.6. ὡς παρα). 
At first sight we might expect a preposition; but cp. p. 70 lines 1 
and 6, and p. 190 lines 24, 25. 

82 5, 6 The same illustration is used, without mention of its 
author, in Aristot. ef. 11 9, 9. There, however, θανόντα (ἀπο- 
θανόντα ὃ 211) is not given, though clearly needed in a sentence of 
this artificial kind. 


82 13, 14 The passage of Theopompus from which these words 
are taken has been preserved by Athenaeus (v1 260 F) and will be 
found in Miller # 4. G. τ p. 320, the words themselves running 
there as follows: ὅθεν δικαίως avy τις αὐτοὺς οὐχ ἑταίρους ἀλλ᾽ ἑταίρας 
ὑπέλαβεν, οὐδὲ στρατιώτας ἀλλὰ χαμαιτύπας προσηγόρευσεν. ἀνδροφόνοι 
γὰρ τὴν φύσιν ὄντες ἀνδρόπορνοι τὸν τρόπον ἦσαν. The passage is also 
quoted by Norden Awnstprosa 1 pp. 122, 123. For Theopompus, 
see 7. ὕψ. p. 242 and Dionys. Hal. 22. ad FPomp.c. 6. In § 75 of 
the π. ἕρμ. Theopompus is represented as a ‘forcible-feeble’ or 
‘feeble-forcible’: cp. $$ 240, 247, 250. Dionysius, on the contrary, 
excites regret for the loss of his writings. 

82 16,17 θυμὸς yap τέχνης οὐ δεῖται : on the principle that ‘facit 
indignatio versus.’ Cp. ὃ 250 κακοτεχνοῦντι yap ἔοικεν διὰ THY ἀνταπό- 
δοσιν, μᾶλλον δὲ παίζοντι, οὐκ ἀγανακτοῦντι. 

82 19, 20 Schenkl suspects ὡς ἔδειξα because written in the 
margin of P. But the addition seems to be made by the first hand ; 
and it is thoroughly characteristic (cp. os φημί ὃ 120, ws ἔφην 
§ 98 etc.). 

82 22,23 The sentence quoted from Aristotle’s lost treatise περὶ 
δικαιοσύνης closely resembles Lysias Lvratosth. ὃ 40 ἐπεὶ κελεύετε αὐτὸν 
ἀποδεῖξαι, ὅπου τοσούτους τῶν πολεμίων ἀπέκτειναν ὅσους τῶν πολιτῶν, ἢ 
ναῦς ὅπου τοσαύτας ἔλαβον, ὅσας αὐτοὶ παρέδοσαν, ἢ πόλιν ἥντινα τοιαύ- 
τὴν προσεκτήσαντο, οἵαν τὴν ἡμετέραν κατεδουλώσαντο. 

84 5,6 συνεργοῖεν ἂν has been suggested; but it is doubtful 
whether any certain example of plur. verb with neut. plur. nominat. 
is found in π. ἑρμ. (cp. ἢ. on ἔχουσι § 12). 

84 19—21 ‘This quotation from Demosth. Avistocr. § 99 has a 
close parallel in Demosth. Axdrot. 7 (delivered in 355 B.c., three 
years earlier than the Avzstocrates). 


218 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


86 13 The reference to Archedemus, here and in ὃ 35, is of 
such a nature as to suggest that the author of the z. ἕρμ. may have 
drawn a good deal of his doctrine from him and may be acknowledging 
indebtedness to him in the passages where P gives a verb in the third 
person singular (e.g. ὃ 186 ὀνομάζει, altered by Gale and subsequent 
editors to ὀνομάζω). The Stoic Archedemus of Tarsus probably lived 
about 130 B.c., and drew largely (it would seem) on Hermagoras, 
who was himself much indebted to Aristotle, Theophrastus and the 
Stoics. We owe our knowledge of Archedemus chiefly to Diog. 
Laert. (vil 40, 55, 68 etc.) and to Cic. Academ. 11 47, 143. Cp. 
G. Thiele Hermagoras Ὁ. 181: “Dieser Archedemus ist mit Recht 
mit dem bertihmten Tarsenser Stoiker identificiert (Volkmann 47, 
Susemihl, Litteraturgesch. 86) und Diels hat denselben als Quelle fiir 
Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας angesetzt (Abhandl. der Berl. Ak. 1886 ὃ 24).” 
The date of Archedemus is discussed by Brzoska in Pauly-Wissowa 
Real-Enc. τι p. 440. 


86 22 See Syrianus, as quoted in the Introduction p. ὅτ. 
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, has well pointed out (Hermes xxxv 30) 
that the recognition by Philodemus of four πλάσματα (viz. adpov, 
ἰσχνόν, μέγα, yAadupov) suggests caution in assigning to the 7. ἑρμ. 
a date subsequent to the birth of Christ simply on the ground of its 
classification of styles. Few would attempt to date a Greek Grammar 
(say) purely by the internal evidence afforded by its classification of 
the declensions. 


86 27 The nature of the fundamental difference between the 
‘elevated’ (or ‘grand’), and the ‘plain,’ style is well indicated by 
Dionysius: Γοργίας μὲν τὴν ποιητικὴν ἑρμηνείαν μετήνεγκεν eis λόγους 
πολιτικούς, οὐκ ἀξιῶν ὅμοιον τὸν ῥήτορα τοῖς ἰδιώταις εἶναι: Λυσίας δὲ 
τοὐναντίον ἐποίησε᾽ τὴν γὰρ φανερὰν ἅπασι καὶ τετριμμένην λέξιν 
ἐζήλωσεν ἔγγιστα νομίζων εἶναι τοῦ πεῖσαι τὸν ἰδιώτην τὸ κοινὸν τῆς 
ὀνομασίας καὶ ἀφελές (Dionys. Hal. de Lmitat. τι 7). The same 
distinction is clearly marked in the same authors de 7hucyd. c. 23 
οἱ μὲν οὖν ἀρχαῖοι πάνυ καὶ ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν μόνον γινωσκόμενοι τῶν ὀνομάτων 
ποίαν τινὰ λέξιν ἐπετήδευσαν, οὐκ ἔχω συμβαλεῖν, πότερα τὴν λιτὴν καὶ 
ἀκόσμητον καὶ μηδὲν ἔχουσαν περιττόν, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὰ τὰ χρήσιμα καὶ 
ἀναγκαῖα, ἢ τὴν πομπικὴν καὶ ἀξιωματικὴν καὶ ἐγκατάσκευον καὶ τοὺς 
ἐπιθέτους προσειληφυῖαν κόσμους : and in Cic. Brut. 55, 201 ‘ oratorum 
bonorum (hos enim quaerimus) duo genera sunt, unum attenuate 
presseque, alterum sublate ampleque dicentium.”—It may be added 


NOTES 219 


here that Greek specimens of the various types of style will be found 
in Jebb’s Attic Orators and Selections from the Attic Orators. 


88 7—13 ‘The argument in § 37, as compared with ὃ 36, seems 
to be this: the χαρακτὴρ γλαφυρὸς and the χαρακτὴρ δεινὸς are not 
mere subdivisions of the Xap: ἰσχνὸς and the Xap. μεγαλοπρεπὴς 
respectively, since they have a separate existence and can be actually 
seen combined in one and the same author, e.g. Homer. 


88 τὸ Aristot. Ret. 111 8, 6 ἔστιν δὲ παῖανος δύο εἴδη ἀντικείμενα 
ἀλλήλοις, ὧν τὸ μὲν ἐν ἀρχῇ ἁρμόττει, ὥσπερ καὶ χρῶνται" οὗτος δ᾽ 
ἐστὶν οὗ ἄρχει μὲν ἡ μακρά, τελευτῶσιν δὲ τρεῖς βραχεῖαι....... ἕτερος δ᾽ ἐξ 
ἐναντίας, οὗ βραχεῖαι ἄρχουσιν τρεῖς, ἡ δὲ μακρὰ τελευταία. That the 
παιὼν 15 μεγαλοπρεπής is not expressly stated by Aristotle, but it is 
implied in his rejection of the iambic rhythm on the ground that δεῖ 
σεμνότητα γενέσθαι Kai ἐκστῆσαι. For Theophrastus in this connexion, 
cp. 7. ἕρμ. ὃ 41. 

88 27 ‘Primarily the infection came from the Soudan’ might also 
be suggested as an English equivalent. But all such parallels are 
probably misleading.—For this extract from Thucydides, see Blass 
Att. Ber. τ 221, and cp. Sandys Orator of Cicero p. 229. 


88 29 τὸ τέλος would usually be written in earlier Greek: cp. 
§ 163, διαφέρουσι δὲ τὸ γελοῖον καὶ εὔχαρι (for τὸ evxXapr).—As illus- 
trating the effectiveness of long syllables at the beginning and at the 
end of a clause, cp. such quatrains in F. W. H. Myers’ Saznt Paul 
as that beginning “So even I, and with a heart more burning.” 
(Some occasional illustrations from the poets may perhaps be allowed 
in accordance with the practice of the z. ἑρμ. itself, and with the 
precept of a modern writer who was certainly no lover of poetic 
prose: ‘‘If I were a professor of English, I would teach my men 
that prose writing is a kind of poetry,” Jowett’s Votes and Sayings.) 
Cp. also Isaiah liv 1, Jeremiah ix 1, Habakkuk ii 12, Nahum 11 9, 
St Matthew xii 28, Job xxxvil 16 (as quoted by Ruskin in /rondes 
Agrestes, ‘ Know’st thou the balancings of the clouds ?’). 


907 ἐναφανιζομένων : late—Strabo, π. ὕψ., Plutarch, etc. 

90 13 ff. Cp. Sandys Orator pp. 227, 228. 

9017 The paeonic character of the composition in the Aristo- 
telian ᾿Αθηναίων Ilodirefa is noted by Blass “127. Bereds. 111 2, 348. 

90 18 ἄλλως seems = ‘merely,’ as in § 178; in S§ 48, 289 it=‘in 
other cases’ or ‘ otherwise.’ 


220 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


90 22 παραλαβεῖν : for the infinitive, cp. p. 102 |. 22, p. 1161. 2, 
Ῥ. 118]. 13, Ρ. OS Ib 27, Ρ- 162 Ib 24, Ρ. WOAIL 6, Ρ. 192 IL 22. 


90 28 The same example in ὃ 117, where P has ἥκων (without 
variant) and no ἐκεῖ. 


90 29 The meaning seems to be that the succession of long 
syllables will suggest some kind of verse. Cp. Boswell’s Life of 
Johnson (G. Birkbeck Hill’s edition 1 51): “1 have not been 
troubled for a long time with authors desiring my opinion of their 
works. I used once to be sadly plagued with a man who wrote 
verses, but who literally had no other notion of a verse but that it 
consisted of ten syllables. Lay your knife and your fork across your 
plate, was to him a verse :— 

Lay your knife and your fork across your plate. As he wrote a 
great number of verses, he sometimes by chance made good ones, 
though he did not know it.” With the last clause of this extract, 
cp. p. 92 1. 2 πολλοὶ γοῦν μέτρα ἰαμβικὰ λαλοῦσιν οὐκ εἰδότες, though 
the persons there meant are free from all ambition and as innocent as 
M. Jourdain.—ireprimrev, in the metaphorical sense of ‘exceed,’ 
does not elsewhere occur earlier than the fourth century A.D. ὕπερ- 
ἐκπίπτειν 1s, however, used by Plutarch in this sense. 


921, 2 Aristot. Poet. 1V 14 μάλιστα γὰρ λεκτικὸν τῶν μέτρων TO 
ἰαμβεῖόν ἐστιν᾽ σημεῖον δὲ τούτου" πλεῖστα yap ἰαμβεῖα λέγομεν ἐν TH 
διαλέκτῳ τῇ πρὸς ἀλλήλους, ἑξάμετρα δὲ ὀλιγάκις καὶ ἐκβαίνοντες τῆς 
λεκτικῆς ἁρμονίας. Cp. also 11 8, 4 21. 

92 8,9 As showing P’s variation in spelling, cp. p. 76 lines 23, 
24 ᾿Αλικαρνασῆος and ἀπόδεξις. 

92 14 The variations between Thucydides’ text and that given 
in the z. ἑρμ. are noted in Hude’s Zhucyd. Hist. 1 p. 192. 


945 Cp. Tennyson Geraint and Enid, “All thro’ the crash of 
the near cataract hears,” or “Then at the dry harsh roar of the great 
horn” (Last Tournament). 

94 7 ὑπερβολῇ is suggested by Weil (after Walz). ὑπερβολή, 
however, seems to be in the same construction as δυσήκοος : ὑπερβολὴ 
δ᾽ ἐμφαίνουσα would certainly be doubtful Greek if it stood for 7 δ᾽ 
ὑπερβολὴ ἐμφαΐφει. 

94 τὸ The rhetorician, from his point of view, tends to regard 
as deliberate much that is simply the instinctive expression of a 
writer’s nature: cp. § 4o. 


NOTES 221 


94 14. Cp. such an ending as ‘admittedly was’ in English. 
Matthew Arnold, in his prose-writings, often arranges his sentences 
in an unusual and ‘jolting’ (but at the same time effective) order. 


94 18, 19 The author's memory has apparently deceived him if 
he means that these expressions are actually used by Thucydides. 


94 26, 27  olov...... ἀσθενὲς may be a gloss. It will be noticed 
that καὶ before οἷον is an editorial insertion. 


96 2,3 For καταχέων, see Classical Review XIV 221. 


96 5 Ps accent (ἐγγυτέρον) probably points to a corruption, and 
ἐγγυτέρω should therefore be adopted, though in a later hand. 

96 7 Cf. the lines in Tennyson’s Princess, beginning ‘Eight 
daughters of the plough.” 


96 22 ff. For this and the following sections, cp. Gregor. Cor. 
(Walz, Rhet. Gr. Vil 2, 1213). 


96 27 The author, here as often elsewhere, intends the single 
line to indicate the entire passage.—For a similar estimate of Homer’s 
art, cp. Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 16 ad fin., καὶ παραπληρώ- 
μασιν εὐφώνοις διείληφεν κτλ. 

98 2 νυ: cp. Hom. //. ΧΧΠῚ 405, 420, 431.---πρότερον : especially 
In 7porepov...... πρίν. 


98 4,5 The passage in the Phaedrus 246 ff., which is ushered 
in by the words ὃ μὲν δὴ μέγας ἐν οὐρανῷ Ζεύς (words perhaps suggested 
by Soph. £2. 174, as quoted in the Introduction p. 44 supra), is often 
referred to by ancient writers, e.g. Lucian Prscator c. 22, who did 
not always understand what has been aptly called its ‘grand Miltonic 
pomp. Here, and in the line from Homer, the δὴ has been roughly 
rendered ‘lo,’ so as to give something of what seems to have been 
the effect of this σύνδεσμος upon the mind of the author of the 
7. €pu., whose words πολλαὶ ἀρχαὶ seem to suggest a number of 
breaks in the sentences quoted: e.g. ‘and He—behold! he is mighty 
Zeus in heaven,’ and ‘but when the time came that behold! they 
reached the ford.’ 


98 τό The remainder of the sentence (αὐτίκα viv ἐθέλεις ἰέναι ;) 
is left for the memory to supply. 


98 17 Praxiphanes: disciple of Theophrastus; grammarian ; 
author of a treatise περὶ ποιημάτων. See W. Christ Griech. Litt.® 
Pp- 592, with the references there given. He is mentioned by 
Marcellinus (Life of Thucyd., c. 29), and also by Philodemus. 


222 DEMETRICGS ON SLYLE 


98 18 Cf. the reiterated O in ‘Locksley Hall’ and the Ay me of 
‘In Memoriam.’ 

98 20 Gregorius Corinthius (Walz, vil 2, 1213) gives lines r6—21 
in the following form: εἰ γοῦν τὸν σύνδεσμον ἐξέλῃς (SIC), συνεξαιρέσεις 
(sic) καὶ τὸ πάθος, καθόλου γάρ, ὥσπερ ὃ Πραξιφάνης φησίν, ἀντὶ μυγμῶν 
παρελαμβάνοντο οἱ τοιοῦτοι σύνδεσμοι καὶ στεναγμῶν, ὥσπερ τὸ αἱ at καὶ 
τὸ φεῦ φεῦ- τοῦτο δὲ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐπεσημήνατο ἐν τῷ" 

Καί νύ κ᾽ ὀδυρομένοισιν ἔδυ φάος ἠελίοιο. 
ἔμφασιν γάρ τινα οἴκτου καὶ πάθους ἐνεδείξατο. It is not altogether 
clear whether the words αὐτός φησι in the π. €pu., and καὶ αὐτὸς 
ἐπεσημήνατο in Greg. Cor., refer to Praxiphanes or to Homer; more 
probably to the former. Perhaps, as Mr Mathews suggests, there 
is a fanciful suggestion of καίνω in καί νυ. 

98 23, 24 πρὸς οὐδὲν ἔπος : cp. Aristoph. Lecles. 750 οὐ yap τὸν 
ἐμὸν ἱδρῶτα καὶ φειδωλίαν | οὐδὲν πρὸς ἔπος οὕτως ἀνοήτως ἐκβαλῶ. 
‘Apropos of nothing.’ πρὸς οὐδὲν simply p. 98 lines 1 and 22, 
p. 168 1. 8. 

98 25 ‘This line seems to be attributed to Sophocles by Aristot. 
Rhet. ΠΙ 9, 4; cp. Roemer Avistot. Ars Phe.’ p. xlix. 


98 29 Cp. D. G. Rossetti’s refrains Sing Eden Bower! and 

Alas the hour in his ‘Eden Bower’; and Shakespeare’s burlesque line 
‘ith hey, ho, the wind and the rain, in ‘Twelfth Night.’ 

100 4,5 ἀνθυπαλλάσσοντα διαταττομένῳ : Cp. Introd. Pp: 58 supra, 
and J. H. Moulton’s statement (‘Grammatical Notes from the 
Papyri,’ Classical Review Xv 32) that oo and ττ in recently published 
papyri seem to defy any attempt to reduce them to rule. 

100 13. We might have expected ay, but cp. p. 72 1. 5, p. 98 1. 11, 
p- 100 1. 29, p. 104 1. 19, p. 136 1. 17, p. 162 1. το, p. 198 1. το. 

100 13, 14. Cp. Aristot. Ahez. 111 2, 3 θαυμασταὶ yap τῶν ἀπόντων 
εἰσίν, ἡδὺ δὲ τὸ θαυμαστόν ἐστιν: and π. ὕψ. 35, 5 εὐπόριστον μὲν 
ἀνθρώποις τὸ χρειῶδες ἢ καὶ ἀναγκαῖον, θαυμαστὸν δ᾽ ὅμως ἀεὶ τὸ παρά- 
dofov. The author of the π. vw. finds this principle illustrated in 
men’s attitude to natural objects as well as to the arts of style. 

100 17 P has μέγα, not μέγαν : cp. P’s reading on p. 84 1. 4. 

100 24 The same passage of the //ad is quoted, and the secret 
of its effectiveness expounded, in Aristot. “ez. 11 12, 4: as also 
(after Demetrius) in Greg. Cor. (Walz Rhet. Gr. vil pp. 1189, 1190). 
Cp. in English: ‘Elaine the fair, Elaine the lovable, | Elaine, the lily 


NOTES 223 


maid of Astolat” (the beginning of Tennyson’s Lancelot and Elaine); 
and, in Greek, the repetition of the pronoun αὐτὸς in the fragment 
of Aeschylus quoted at the end of the second book of Plato’s 
Republic. 

100 25 Gregorius (l.c.) has: σχεδὸν yap ἅπαξ τοῦ Νιρέως ὀνομασ- 
θέντος ἐν τῷ τῆς ποιήσεως γράμματι οὐδὲν ἧττον ἢ ᾿Αχιλλέως δ᾽ 
᾿Οδυσσέως μεμνήμεθα: καίτοι κατὰ ἔπος ἑκάστων (sic) λαλουμένων σχεδόν" 
αἰτία δ᾽ ἡ τοῦ σχήματος δύναμις. Gregorius thus confirms P’s λαλου- 
μένων, as against the vulgate καλουμένων. Should not ἕκαστον be 
read in place of ἑκάστων, and ἐν τῷ τῆς ποιήσεως δράματι in place of 
ἐν TO τῆς ποιήσεως γράμματι, in this passage of Gregorius ? 

100 28 Cp. Gregor. Cor. (Walz, Fhe? Gr., Vil 2, 1190): εἰ δ᾽ 
οὕτως εἶπε, Νιρεὺς 6 ᾿Αγλαΐας υἱὸς ἐξ Αἰσύμνης τρεῖς νῆας ἦγε, Tapace- 
σιωπηκέναι ἂν Νιρέα τὸν κάλλιστον ἔδοξεν: ὥσπερ γὰρ ἐν ταῖς ἑστιάσεσι 
τὰ ὀλίγα πολλὰ διαλυθέντα πως φαίνεται, οὕτω Kav τοῖς λόγοις ἐστίν" 
ὅρα δὲ πῶς τὸ σχῆμα ἐμιμήσατο τὴν τοῦ προσώπου εὐείδειαν: ἐπεὶ γὰρ 
πρόσωπόν τι ὑπέκειτο ἀμορφίᾳ κοσμούμενον, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τὴν ἐπανα- 
φοράν, ἥτις ἐστὶ σχῆμα τοῦ κάλλους, παρέλαβεν. 

102 9 μεγαλειότερον...... μᾶλλον : cp. p. 118 lines 21, 22 and 
p. 128 1. 17. For instances, in earlier Greek, of comparatives and 
superlatives thus intensified, reference may be made \to Kuhner 
Grammatik® 11 pp. 25, 26. English examples (such as ‘more braver’ 
in the Zempest, and ‘most unkindest’ in /w/ius Caesar) will be found 
in Abbott’s Shakespearian Grammar Ὁ. 22, where doubt is thrown 
on Ben Jonson’s view that ‘this is a certain kind of English atticism, 
imitating the manner of the most ancientest and finest Grecians.” 
Bottom, it is pointed out, speaks of “the more better assurance.” 

102 το Just as the insertion of ‘and’ would (quite apart from 
considerations of metre) make the following lines of Tennyson 
commonplace: “‘ The seeming-injured simple-hearted thing” (AZerdin 
and Vivien) ; ““ \ron-jointed, supple-sinewed, they shall dive, and they 
shall run” (Locksley Hall); “That all the decks were dense with 
stately forms, | Black-stoled, black-hooded, like a dream” (Passing 
of Arthur). 

102 τι This section seems intended to show that the opposite 
practice to that advocated in § 60 may sometimes conduce to 
elevation: just as (ὃ 63) both asyndeton and polysyndeton are 
effective, each in its place. The same passage of Thucydides is 
quoted by Dionys. Halic. Zp. ad Amm. c. 4: see D. LZ, p. 179. 


224 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Here (1. 14), as often elsewhere in the z. épu., the remainder of the 
quotation is implied; the point is that ἐλειποψύχησέ τε καὶ πεσόντος 
αὐτοῦ ἐς τὴν παρεξειρεσίαν ἡ ἀσπὶς περιερρύη ἐς τὴν θάλασσαν is More 
impressive than ἐλειποψύχησέ τε καὶ ἔπεσεν εἰς τὴν παρεξειρεσίαν καὶ 
ἀπέβαλε τὴν ἀσπίδα ἐς τὴν θάλασσαν. Kiihner (Grammatik® 1 pp. 
665—667) gives classical examples (which are more numerous than 
is usually supposed) of the genitive absolute used where the nominat., 
acc. or dat., of the participle in agreement might have stood. 
Probably this free use was due, at least in part, to a desire to avoid 
monotony of case-termination. The decline of the genit. abs. in 
N.T. Greek is illustrated by Jannaris ({estorical Greek Grammar, 
p- 500), while Blass (Grammar of New Testament Greek pp. 251,252) 
gives instances of its use, over-emphasizing perhaps the departure 
from classical usage. 
102 18 εἰργάσατο: gnomic aorist. 


102 19, 20 ‘These words are not found in Herodotus, in whom 
the nearest parallel is 1 203: καὶ τὰ μὲν πρὸς τὴν ἑσπέρην φέροντα τῆς 
θαλάσσης ταύτης ὃ Καύκασος παρατείνει, ἐὼν οὐρέων καὶ πλήθεϊ μέγιστον 
καὶ μεγάθεϊ ὑψηλότατον. What the author clearly has in view is some 
such repetition as that of the word ‘black’ in Milton’s // Penseroso: 
“‘O’erlaid with black, staid Wisdom’s hue; | Black, but such as in 
esteem | Prince Memnon’s sister might beseem.” 

102 24 ot ἀρχαῖοι: cp. S§ 15, 175, 244. The reference some- 
times seems to be to the writers (such as Hecataeus and Herodotus) 
earlier than the ‘artistic prose’ initiated by Gorgias; at other times 
to the classical writers generally (the ‘ancients,’ as viewed from a 
later standpoint). 

102 25, 26 ‘ars celare artem’; a studied simplicity. 

104 12 Eos: the context makes it clear that Greek v cannot 
have been = English v, as has sometimes been supposed. We might, 
indeed, have expected the word to be given in the genitive or dative 
case and thus to consist of vowels from beginning to end; but the author 
probably ignores the case-mark which varies with the construction.— 
In English cp. faéry in “ faéry elves” (Milton, Paradise Lost, Bk 1), 
and in “‘faéry lands forlorn” (Keats, Ode to a Nightingale). 

104 23, 24 τῶν ἑπτὰ φωνηέντων : the writer of the 7. ἑρμ. is 
clearly much interested both in Egypt and in music, cp. S§ 158, 74, 
176. The number ‘seven’ would apply either to the Egyptian or to 
the Greek alphabet. For the seven vowels in Greek, cp. Dionysia 


NOTES 225 


Thracis Ars Grammatica p. 9 (ed Uhlig): τούτων (τῶν γραμμάτων) 
—€7 LO 


φωνήεντα μέν ἐστιν ἑπτά: ἃ ῦ ὦ. φωνήεντα δὲ λέγεται, ὅτι φωνὴν 
ad ἑαυτῶν ἀποτελεῖ. 

104 28 The author pulls himself up (as in § 195, when speaking 
about the art of acting); but he has said enough perhaps to imply 
that he may have lived at Alexandria. 


104 30 ἤτοι occurs in § 6, 30, 72, 97, 157, 201. In all these 
sections a following ἢ is either expressed or implied,—rov δὲ μικρῶν 
κώλων in κα 6, συγκρούονται καὶ δίφθογγοι διφθόγγοις in ὃ 72, and 
πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ προσπλάσσομεν in ὃ 157. It does not seem to be 
used, as has sometimes been thought, in the sense of ‘namely.’ 


106 x So Eustathius: τὸ δὲ “λᾶαν ἄνω ὠθεσκε ποτὶ λόφον᾽ ἐπαι- 
νεῖται χάριν τῆς συνθήκης. ἐμφαίνει γὰρ τὴν δυσχέρειαν τοῦ τῆς ὠθήσεως 
ἔργου τῇ τῶν φωνηέντων ἐπαλληλίᾳ, δι ὧν ὀγκούντων τὸ στόμα οὐκ 
ἐᾶται τρέχειν ὃ λόγος, ἀλλ᾽ ὀκνηρὰ βαίνει συνεξομοιούμενος τῇ ἐργωδίᾳ 
τοῦ avw ὠθεῖν. 

Cp. Pope “‘ When Ajax strives some rock’s vast weight to throw, | 
The line too labours, and the words move slow” (Lssay on Criticism). 
—Rapid movement, on the other hand, is well illustrated by the 
concluding line in this passage of the Odyssey: αὖτις ἔπειτα πέδονδε 
κυλίνδετο AGas ἀναιδής (Odyss. ΧΙ 598), which Sandys translates ‘“ Down- 
ward anon to the valley the boulder remorselessly bounded” (Cope’s 
Rhetoric U1 126).—Cp. D. 7. p. 18. 


106 5 The example seems to be introduced abruptly, but cp. 
the note referring to p. 124 l. 25. 


106 13,14 Eg. on εἰεἱὶλισσόμενος (for which in Eurip. ZZ. 437 
and Aristoph. Frogs 1314, see Classical Review xv 344, and cp. the 
Delphic Hymn to Apollo and D. B. Monro’s Modes of Ancient Greek 
Music pp. 132, 134). μέλισμα -- μελισμός, which is thus defined by 
Herodian (Zfimer. p. 180 Boiss.): μελισμὸς (ἐστὶν) ὅταν τὸν αὐτὸν 
φθόγγον πλεονάκις ἢ ἅπαξ Kata μουσικὸν μέλος μετά τινος ἐνάρθρου 
συλλαβῆς προλαμβάνωμεν. It is thus equivalent to a ‘shake’ or 
‘trill,’ 

106 18 One of the comparatively few passages in which reference 
is made to πράγματα or διάνοια. 


106 23, 24 ἀπρεπὲς ποιεῖν τῷ πράγματι: for the dative with 
ἀπρεπής, see the passages quoted in Stephanus s. v. 


R. 15 


226 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


108 1 The painter Nicias here in question seems to have been 
the contemporary of Praxiteles mentioned by Pliny. 


108 το ©Anastasius Gennadius suggests ποιημάτων for ποιητῶν. 


108 12. The subjunctive with εἰ is retained in the text, since it 
has a parallel (εἰ yap συναφθῇ ταῦτα συνδέσμοις) on p. 190 1. 23 of 
this treatise. The usage is very rare in Attic prose, but frequent in 
later writers such as Diodorus, Plutarch, and even Lucian. 


108 13—16 Compare and contrast Aristot. Aer. 1 2, 6 τὸ δὲ 
κύριον καὶ TO οἰκεῖον καὶ μεταφορὰ μόνα χρήσιμα πρὸς THY τῶν ψιλῶν 
λόγων λέξιν. σημεῖον δ᾽ ὅτι τούτοις μόνοις πάντες χρῶνται: πάντες γὰρ 
μεταφοραῖς διαλέγονται καὶ τοῖς οἰκείοις καὶ τοῖς κυρίοις, στε δῆλον 


Q x > a ” \ \ rd 6 ΄ > , N A 
Ws av εὖ TOW) τις, εσται TE ξενικὸν και AQVUGQVELV ἐνδέχεται και σαφηνιεῖ. 


108 17 ΕῸΓ metaphors, see Anistot. Rez. 111 cc. 2, 3, 4, 6, το, 
11; together with Cope’s Latroduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric pp. 286, 
374—379, and Volkmann’s fhetortk der Griechen und Romer® pp. 
417—421. Whenever a metaphor is either praised or condemned 
by a Greek critic on what seem to us insufficient grounds, we have 
to bear in mind that metaphors generally have lost much of their 
freshness through constant use: cp. Jebb’s Selections from the Attic 
Orators® p. xvi and Cope’s edition of Aristotle’s Rhetoric vol. 1 
p. 46. 

108 20 μήτε: we should expect μηδέ.---πόρρωθεν : cp. Aristot. 
Rhet. 111 2, 12 and it 3, 4. 

108 21 ἔοικεν : the singular verb is to be remarked, followed as 
it is by ἀλλήλοις and three separate subjects. Gregorius Corinthius 
(Walz Rhet. Gr. vil 2, 1161) gives ἐοίκασιν ἀλλήλοις 6 στρατηγὸς Kal 
ὃ κυβερνήτης καὶ ὃ ἡνίοχος. 

108 25 The form νηὸς may point to a poetical quotation; but 
cp. Introduction p. 59 supra. 

108 26 As Cope (Lntroduction to Aristotle's Rhetoric p. 292) 
points out, Demetrius has in mind Aristot. Aer. 11 4 and Poet. c. 21 
and wishes to explain (in qualification of Aristotle’s statements) that 
the reciprocity of metaphors is not uniform. 


108 28 An attempt has been made in P to change ποιητὴν into 
ποιητῇ, SO as to get the more obvious construction with ἐξῆν. 


110 1, 2 For the relation of metaphor and simile, see Cope’s 
Introduction p. 299 and Volkmann’s Lheforik p. 418. 


NOTES 227 


110 4 For Python, see W. W. Goodwin’s edition of the De 
Corona p. 100. 

110 5 Cp. π. ὕψ. ΧΧΧΙΙ 3 διόπερ ὃ μὲν ᾿Αριστοτέλης καὶ ὃ Θεό- 
ῴφραστος μειλίγματά φασί τινα τῶν θρασειῶν εἶναι ταῦτα μεταφορῶν, τὸ 
“ὡσπερεὶ φαναι καὶ “οἱονεὶ καὶ ‘ei χρὴ τοῦτον εἰπεῖν τὸν τρόπον᾽ καὶ “εἰ 
δεῖ παρακινδυνευτικώτερον λέξαι. ἢ γὰρ ὑποτίμησις, φασίν, ἰᾶται τὰ 
τολμηρά. By μειλίγματα is here meant ‘emollitiones,’ while a little 
later ἀλεξιφάρμακα (‘remedia’) is used with reference to the πάθη.--- 
The chapter on ‘Simile and Metaphor’ in Abbott and Seeley’s Zngdsh 
Lessons may be consulted with advantage. 


110 7, 8 For Plato’s tendency to poetic diction, see Dionys. 
Halic. Ep. ad Pomp. c. 2; together with D. H. pp. 27—30 and 
Norden’s Kunstprosa 1 pp. 104 ff. 

110 10 Cp. Aristot. Weft. 1 11, 1—4, where the same illus- 
trations are quoted. See also Volkmann, Phe/or7h, p. 410. 

110 12. τὸ ἐπὶ τοῦ βέλους, sub. εἰρημένον : cp. p. 200 1. 8, p. 130 
IL ΡΤ. IL WA, Ὁ 122}: ὕ: 

110 15 Compare in English such personifications as ‘‘Where the 
wind’s feet shine along the sea” (Swinburne, Poems and Lallads) ; 
“And Autumn laying here and there | A fiery finger on the leaves” 
(Tennyson, Zz Memoriam). 


110 19 ἤπερ: an Ionic form, frequent in Homer and Herodotus; 
absent from Attic prose, except once in Aristotle; occurs in late 
prose, Polybius, Arrian etc. Also found in § 12. 


110 20 Cp. “Air shudders with shrill spears crossing, and 
hurtling of wheels that roar” (Swinburne, “7vechtheus); or the 
different yet parallel metaphor, ‘‘Dash’d on every rocky square | 
Their surging charges foam’d themselves away” (Tennyson, Ode on 
the Death of the Duke of Wellington). 


110 28 A familiar instance in English is: ‘While England’s 
fate, | Like a clipped guinea, trembles in the scale” (Sheridan, The 
Critic, τι 2, 306). 

112 1—4 Criticism and defence alike seem laboured, the 
repetition of the verb ἠχεῖν being especially clumsy. Would the 
critic in the same way have attacked Swinburne’s “ And heaven rang 
round her as she came | Like smitten cymbals” (4¢alanta in Calydon)? 
The third chapter in Aristotle’s Rhetoric Book 111 reminds us how 
different the ancient point of view was from the modern.—This 


I5—2 


228 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


passage of the 7. ἑρμ. 1s reproduced, with certain variations, .by 
Gregor. Cor. (Walz, Avet. Gr. vil 2, 1161). 


112 7 Cp. Volkmann Rhetorik der Gr. τι. Romer* p. 421. 


112 8 Mr Dakyns (Works of Xenophon 1 107) refers to Gold- 
smith (Essay XVI, on ‘ Metaphor’), who translates “part of the 
phalanx fluctuated on the march.” 


112 16 An interesting question arises as to which Theognis 
is here meant. Bergk proposed Θεοδέκτης or Θεόδωρος in place of 
Θέογνις. He thought that the metaphor in question could not 
have been used by Theognis of Megara. My friend and former 
pupil Mr T. Hudson Williams, who has made a special study 
of the remains of Theognis, writes as follows: “1 seems quite 
impossible to father the expression φόρμιγγα axopdov on Theognis 
of Megara, as his style is so simple and straightforward. The 
only words in the collection bearing his name that might be com- 
pared with φόρμιγξ axopdos are ἄγγελος ἀφθογγος (of a beacon- 
light) 1. 549. If the reading Θέογνις is correct, we are compelled to 
assign the words to Theognis Tragicus. Although it seems natural 
to regard the Megarian as the Theognis ‘par excellence’—the 
Theognis ‘ without an epithet,’ he is by no means always mentioned 
without a distinguishing expression such as Meyapevs (Xen. in Stob. 
Serm. 88), or Θέογνις ὃ ποιήσας τὰς ὑποθήκας (Schol. Thucyd. τι 43). 
Aristophanes always refers to the Athenian simply as Theognis (ὦ 
Θέογνι Ach. 11, Θέογνις Ach. 140, ὃ Θέογνις Thesm. 170). Possibly 
some of the poems of the Athenian were falsely attributed to the 
Megarian. Suidas says of Theognis of Megara ἔγραψεν ἐλεγείαν εἰς 
τοὺς σωθέντας τῶν Συρακοσίων ἐν τῇ πολιορκίᾳ, a Statement which has 
puzzled all critics and commentators. Sitzler (Zheog. Relig. p. 52) 
proposes to read εἰς τοὺς σωθέντας ἐν τῇ πολιορκίᾳ τῶν Συρακουσῶν, 
and refers the words to an elegy composed by Theognis of Athens 
on the survivors of the Sicilian Expedition.” Nauck (Zyvagic. Graec. 
fragm. p. 769) also attributes the phrase to Theognis Tragicus, 
printing it as his one surviving fragment. The weight of authority is, 
thus, against Theognis of Megara. Qn the other side, however, 
should be set the parallel adduced by Mr Williams, together with 
the fact that, immediately after his death, Theognis Tragicus had 
probably dropped again into that obscurity from which he was lifted 
by the genius of Aristophanes, as whose butt he became momentarily 
famous.—No light is thrown on the authorship of the words by 


NOTES 229 


Aristot. Ref. 11 11, τὰ οἷον ἡ ἀσπὶς φαμέν ἐστι φιάλη “Apews, καὶ 
τόξον φόρμιγξ ἄχορδος. If the author of the π. ἑρμ. has borrowed his 
illustration of the ‘stringless lyre’ directly from the Mheforic, he 
must have added the name of the writer on his own account. 

112 19, 20 Cp. ὃ 91 καθόλου yap ταύτην (τὴν συνήθειαν) κανόνα 
ποιοῦμαι πάσης ὀνομασίας, and Horace, Ars Poet., 71, 72. 

112 22 λευκήν τε φωνήν : a voice clear in timbre (Neil’s Knights 
of Aristophanes p. 167), opposed to dara as in Latin vox candida 15 
opposed to vox fusca, Quintil. x1 3, 15, Cic. WV. D. πὶ 146. 


112 29 Sandys (Orvator of Cicero, p. 93): ‘“‘ When we apply the 
term ‘eye’ to the bud or shoot of a plant or tuber, we use a true 
metaphor which has its parallel in the Lat. ocw/us (‘oculus gemmans’ 
Col. 4, 24, 16), and the Greek ὀφθαλμὸς (ὃ τῆς ἀμπέλου ὀφθαλμός, 
Demetr. de eloc. ὃ 87).” The 7. épu. may here have Theophrastus 
in mind. 

114 2 κτένες: the parts of the body to which this word may 
apply are as various as the χζός, the pudenda (cp. Lat. fecten), the 
Jingers, the incisors. 

11415 Cp.§ 220 καὶ περὶ évapyeias μὲν ws ἐν τύπῳ εἰπεῖν τοσαῦτα. 

114 16 ff. Cf. Aristot. Ret. 111 3, 3 οἱ δ᾽ ἄνθρωποι τοῖς διπλοῖς 
χρῶνται, ὅταν ἀνώνυμον ἢ καὶ ὁ λόγος εὐσύνθετος, οἷον τὸ χρονοτριβεῖν" 
ἀλλ᾽ ἂν πολύ, πάντως ποιητικόν. 

114 25 σιτοπομπίαν : cp. Demosth. de Cor. ὃ 241 καὶ τῆς σιτο- 
πομπίας τῆς τῶν “Ῥλλήνων κύριος, and § 301 ibid. 

114 29 ©The ‘word’ in question is not a noun (6vaypos), as has 
been usually supposed, but a verb. The passage in Xen. Anad. τ 
5, 2 TuUNS: καὶ of μὲν ὄνοι, ἐπεί τις διώκοι, προδραμόντες ἕστασαν: πολὺ 
yap τῶν ἵππων ἔτρεχον θᾶττον: καὶ πάλιν ἐπεὶ πλησιαζοιεν οἱ ἵπποι 
ταὐτὸν ἐποίουν, καὶ οὐκ ἦν λαβεῖν, εἰ μὴ διαστάντες οἱ ἱππεῖς θηρῷεν 
διαδεχόμενοι [τοῖς ἵπποις]. 

114 31 There seems no construction for ὀνόματι, unless we 
substitute some such word as δηλῶν for οἷον. 


116 3 Spengel suggests (though he does not print in his text) 
δεῖ πολλὰ τιθέναι. But (1) the author is thinking of double com- 
pounds, such as προσπεριορίζεσθαι, of which there are so many in 
the 7. vy. and comparatively few in the 7. ἑρμ. (though μετασυντίθημι, 
ὑποκατασκευάζω, ἀνθυπαλλάσσω, συνεξαίρω occur); (2) the infinitive 
for imperative is rather a favourite idiom with him. 


230 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


116 5 It has been suggested that ὁρίζονται is a passive verb, 
and τὰ δὲ πεποιημένα ὀνόματα the subject to it. But elsewhere ($$ ο, 
II, 34, 106, 114, 173) ὁρίζομαι in the sense of ‘define’ is middle; 
and no certain instance of plural verb with neuter plural nominative 
is found in the treatise. The subject to ποιεῖ (I. 7), λέγει (I. 9) and 
ἔοικεν (]. 11), seems to be Homer, and the construction in |. 8 to be 
διὰ τὸ (τὰ ὀνόματα) οἷον ψόφοις ἐοικέναι. [In § 1 and § 35 the active 
δρίζειν means ‘to limit.’ Cp. ὅροι in ὃ τ with ὅρος in § 34. ] 

116 7 The repetition of μάλιστα in the following line may point 
to some corruption. 


116 8. E.g. such lines of Homer as that quoted from // ΧΧῚΠ 
in ὃ 219, or Tennyson’s ‘‘The sound of many a heavily-galloping 
hoof”. (Geraint and Enid). 


116 15 σκυθίζειν. Ammon (Bursian’s Jahresbericht, 1900: p. 207) 
suggests μυσίζειν, comparing Dionys. Halic. De Avtig. Orat. prooem. 
c. 1.—In English, cp. Byron’s Don Juan, canto vii, st. 15, τό, 17. 


110 τς, τό ὡς...... δόξει. The grammatical point is well dis- 
cussed by Dahl in his dissertation ‘ Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας, p. 31. 
—There is apparently no authority in late Greek for μεταξὺ with the 
dative, as given here by P. 


116 20 The word σκαφίτης occurs elsewhere (as far as our 
evidence goes) only in Strabo, Geograph. Xv 817, μικρὸν δ᾽ ὑπὲρ 
τῆς ᾿λεφαντίνης ἐστὶν ὃ μικρὸς καταράκτης, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ Kal θέαν τινὰ οἱ 
σκαφῖται τοῖς ἡγεμόσιν ἐπιδείκνυνται. Possibly the author of the 
7. ἕρμ., who is specially interested in Egypt, has this passage in 
mind. Here he seems to be complimentary; in other passages 
(S$ 115, 121, 126, 187, 188, 236, 237, 238, 239) τις usually introduces 
an offending author,—mostly some schoolman occupied with scho- 
lastic futilities. 


116 22 μόνος and αὐτὸς are found combined in z. vy. ΧΧΧν 4 
Kal ποταμοὺς ἐνίοτε τοῦ γηγένους ἐκείνου Kal αὐτοῦ μόνου προχέουσιν 
πυρός, ‘that pure and unmixed subterranean fire.’ Here the words 
mean one who lives ‘all alone,’ an eremite, a recluse. There is no 
independent authority for the existence of αὐτίτης in Aristotle, though 
μονώτης is found in £th. ic. 17 etc. Cp. ὃ 144. 


116 23 The verb ἐλελίζειν occurs in Xen. Anad. 1 8, 18 ws δὲ 
πορευομένων ἐξεκύμαινέ τι τῆς φάλαγγος (Cp. π- ἑρμ. ὃ 84), τὸ ὑπολειπό- 
μενον ἤρξατο δρόμῳ θεῖν: καὶ ἅμα ἐφθέγξαντο πάντες οἷον τῷ ᾿Ενυαλίῳ 


NOTES 231 


ἐλελίζουσι, καὶ πάντες δὲ ἔθεον : and Anab. ν 2, 14 ἐπεὶ δ᾽ ἐπαιάνισαν 
καὶ ἡ σάλπιγξ ἐφθέγξατο, ἅμα τε τῷ ᾿Ενυαλίῳ ἠλέλιξαν καὶ ἔθεον δρόμῳ 
οἱ ὁπλῖται, κτλ. 

118 τ Abrupt transition to ἀλληγορία. The same example is 
used to illustrate δεινότης in ὃ 243. 

118 3 Possibly χαμᾶθεν should be read: see Liddell and Scott, 
eV. 


118 6 συγκαλύμματι: a late word,—-LXX, etc. 


118 τι The suggestion ἐν ἀδύτῳ (for P’s ἐν αὐτῷ) made by a 
later hand in the margin of P is distinctly interesting. 


118 τό This line is given in Aristot. Poet. ΧΧΙ 2, and in 
Aristot. Rez. 111 2, 12, where the notes of Cope and Sandys should 
be consulted, the second line οὕτω συγκόλλως ὥστε σύναιμα ποιεῖν 
being preserved by Athenaeus (x 452).—Perhaps as a modern 
specimen of ‘allegory’ might be quoted D. G. Rossetti’s lines in Zhe 
House of Life (Sonnet xlv): ‘‘ Because our talk was of the cloud- 
control | And moon-track of the journeying face of Fate,” i.e. We 
talked of the uncertainty of human destinies.—For Cleobulina, see 
Bergk P. Z. G.* πὶ p. 62, and Bursian’s Jahresber. ΧΧΝΠΙ τ Ὁ. 86. 
The line is inferred to be by Cleobulina from a reference to it in 
Plut. Sept. Sap. Conviv. c. το. 

118 23 In the =. épu. the preposition ἐν is occasionally used 
with something of an instrumental force, as in the Greek Testament : 
ἘΡῚΡ 01 0» 17S) 1.) Ὁ» 149 1. τῇ: 


118 24 Xen. Anab. τ 8, 20 τὰ δ᾽ ἅρματα ἐφέρετο τὰ μὲν δι᾿ αὐτῶν 
τῶν πολεμίων, τὰ δὲ καὶ διὰ τών “Ελλήνων κενὰ ἡνιόχων. 

120 3 συμβέβληται: for the tense, cp. p. 86 lines 4 and 6. 
The perfect has almost a ‘gnomic’ force in these passages. 

1206 Cp. “it strikes | On a wood, and takes, and breaks, and 
cracks, and splits” (Tennyson, Przcess), or “‘Grate on their scrannel 
pipes of wretched straw” (Milton, Zycédas).—The quotation from the 
Liiad is elliptical, as often. In full the passage runs: Alas δ᾽ ὃ μέγας 
αἰὲν ἐφ᾽ Ἕκτορι χαλκοκορυστῇ | let’ ἀκοντίσσαι. 

120 τό Bergk, who claims the fragment for Sappho, reads: 
χαμαὶ δ᾽ ἐπιπορφύρει ἄνθος. But this involves the shortening of 
the v. 

120 20—26 Some lines are omitted in this passage as quoted 
by Demetrius. With the last line, cp. William Morris, Story of Sigurd 


232 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


the Volsung, Book 11: “ Therewith was the Wrath of Sigurd laid soft 
in a golden sheath | And the peace-strings knit around it; for that 
blade was fain of death; | And ’tis ill to show such edges to the 
broad blue light of day, | Or to let the hall-glare light them, if ye 
list not play the play.” 

122 2 The word ‘band’ rather than ‘stripe’ has been chosen in 
the Translation, so as not in any way to beg the difficult question 
referred to in the Introduction p. 54 supra. The immediate context 
may well suggest that some domestic decoration is intended,—a 
carpet, or a band of purple paint or encaustic. On the other hand, 
the laticlave is clearly meant by τῷ πλάτει τῆς πορφύρας in Lucian’s 
Demonax c. 41 ἰδὼν δέ τινα τῶν εὐπαρύφων ἐπὶ τῷ πλάτει τῆς πορφύρας 
μέγα φρονοῦντας. And in the use of σημεῖον on p. 122 |. 3 there may 
be a direct reference to the fact that σημεῖον was used for ‘clavus’ 
and 7 πλατύσημος (sc. ἐσθὴς) for ‘ tunica laticlavia.’ 


122 13 This is not a final line in Homer (//. ΧΙ 113), but the 
first of three consecutive lines: νήπιος, οὐδ᾽ ap ἔμελλε Kakas ὑπὸ κῆρας 
ἀλύξας (not αλύξειν) | ἵπποισιν καὶ ὄχεσφιν ἀγαλλόμενος παρὰ νηών | ἂψ 
ἀπονοστήσειν προτὶ Ἴλιον ἠνεμόεσσαν. 

124 3 παράκειται: defects of qualities: ‘adfinia vitia sunt.’ Cp. 
“finitima et propinqua vitia” (ad Herenn. Iv c. 10).—Perhaps that 
part of the study of style which is negative—which teaches us what 
to avoid—is even more useful than the positive,—that which teaches 
us what to admire. 


124 7 YELTVLOVTOS : the π᾿ ἑρμ. shares this use of γειτνιᾶν with 
Aristotle, καὶ ὅλως δὲ τὸ τίμιον ἄγειν εἰς τὸ καλόν, ἐπείπερ ye δοκεῖ 


γειτνιᾶν ( οί. 1 9, 30). 


124 τι For Sophocles in his less inspired moments, cp. 7. vy. 
p- 241. The authorities who ascribe this line to him are mentioned 
in Nauck? p. 265. The fault here censured is of the same order as 
Wordsworth’s ‘‘prominent feature like an eagle’s beak” (of the 
human nose), or Milton’s ‘‘ with hatefullest disrelish writhed their 
jaws.” It is a fault to which the heightened style is always liable, 
even when it does not actually fall into it: cp. Tennyson’s description 
of a fish-basket in Lxoch Arden, or of a game-pie in Audley Court. 
For a burlesque of this style, see Rezected Addresses, where Doctor 
Johnson’s Ghost is made to describe a door with knocker and bell 
as “ἃ ligneous barricado, decorated with frappant and tintinnabulant 
appendages.” The parody here is not much more extreme than Dr 


NOTES 233 


Johnson’s own change of “when we were taken upstairs, a dirty 
fellow bounced out of the bed on which one of us was to lie” into 
“out of one of the beds on which we were to repose, started up at 
our entrance a man as black as a Cyclops from the forge” (the first 
sentence in a private letter, the second—relating the same incident— 
in the Journey to the Hebrides; the example is given by Lord 
Macaulay). 
12417 Δλιθοβολοῦντος : late,—LXX, N. T., Plutarch, etc. 


124 21 The reference is to Aristot. Ref. 11 3, 1 τὰ δὲ ψυχρὰ 
ἐν τέτταρσι γίγνεται κατὰ τὴν λέξιν, ἔν τε τοῖς διπλοῖς ὀνόμασιν, οἷον 
Λυκόφρων κτλ. The four points mentioned by Aristotle are, in order: 
(1) compound words, (2) obscure words, (3) ‘epithets,’ (4) metaphors. 
There is clearly a gap in our text of the π. épp. 


124 22 Alcidamas: mentioned also ἴῃ ὃ 12. See Aristot. δε. 
ul 3; Brzoska’s article in Pauly-Wissowa I pp. 1533—1539; D. 7. 
Pp. 41. 

124 24 For the insertion of εἰ, cp. p. 102 1. το. 


124 25 It does not seem necessary to insert οἷον after ψυχρόν : 
GD: [0 τὸ IL BO, Ρ΄ WHO 1b UF, jos 196] δ. 


124 26 Possibly the author of this conceit may be Gorgias, to 
are attributed in 


whom the words ‘‘yAwpa καὶ ἔναιμα τὰ πράγματα" 


Aristot. Ret. 111 3, 4. 


126 τ Cp. p. go l. 28 supra. In English, cp. Pope’s satirical 
line “And ten low words oft creep in one dull line” (Assay on 
Criticism). On the other hand, a succession of long syllables has a 
fine effect in Swinburne’s “All thy whole life’s love, thine heart’s 
whole” (Songs before Sunrise). 

126 4 Cp. Aristot. δε, 111 ὃ, 3 διὸ ῥυθμὸν det ἔχειν τὸν λόγον, 
μέτρον δὲ μή: ποίημα yap ἔσται. ῥυθμὸν δὲ μὴ. ἀκριβῶς: τοῦτο δὲ ἔσται 
ἐὰν μέχρι του 7. For examples of the neglect of this principle in 
English prose, see Abbott and Seeley’s Znglish Lessons pp. 94 ff., or 
Ruskin’s Frondes Agrestes ὃ 60 and certain passages in Blackmore’s 
Lorna Doone. In Latin, cp. “Urbem Romam a principio reges 
habuere,” Tac. Azad. init. . 


126 10 The analogy between imposture and frigidity is certainly 
good. But it must be remembered that such elaborate language is 
often half-playfully used by modern writers: e.g. by Tennyson in the 
passage of Audley Court referred to in the note on p. 124 1. 11, or 


234 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


when he describes ladies’ angular handwriting as ‘‘such a hand as when 
a field of corn } Bows all its ears before the roaring East.” Cp. ὃ 120. 
Charles Lamb is fond of such mock-heroics and quaint elegances. 


126 11 For this, as well as other proverbs, see end of Notes. 


126 14 Gorgias and Isocrates may be specially meant. The 
marginal note in P (σημείωσαι ὅπως ἐναντίως φησὶ τῶν ἀλλων) probably 
refers to our author’s dissent from the doctrine of the Isocratic 
school. 

126 τό For Polycrates, see Jebb Af. Or. 11 pp. 94—96 and 
p. 103 ἢ. 2, and Spengel Azz. Script. pp. 76, 77. 

12617 E. Maass (Hermes xxii 576) would supply Θερσίτην, or 
some such name. 

126 29 Cp. Pope (in mock-heroic style): ‘To where Fleet-ditch 
with disemboguing streams | Rolls the large tribute of dead dogs to 
Thames” (Dunciad, Book 11).—The Nile and the Danube are men- 
tioned together in 7. ὕψ. ΧΧΧΥ 4. 

128 4 For the inserted ἢ cp. p. 128]. 11 ἢ καὶ ὅτι κτλ. 

128 6 ἀκουσθῆναι: the active would be more usual, e.g. Eurip. 
Med. 316 λέγεις ἀκοῦσαι μαλθακά. But as Kithner (Gramm. d. gr. 
Sprache*® τι 585) remarks, the active and the passive are found side 
by side even in writers of the classical period, e.g. Isocr. 12, 156 
ποιήσομαι THY ἀρχὴν τῶν λεχθησομένων ἀκοῦσαι μὲν ἴσως τισὶν ἀηδῆ, 
ῥηθῆναι δ᾽ οὐκ ἀσύμφορον .----ὁδὸν ἀνοιγνύναι (1. 7)=viam aperire. 

128 24 The meaning is that the last of the three varieties, that 
specified (εἰρημένη) as ‘impossible’ (1. 20), is the one which specially 
bears that name.—éeéaiperws = κατ᾽ ἐξοχήν, par excellence: late,—Philo, 
Plutarch, ete. 

128 27 κωμῳδοποιοί: specifically Attic word. See Classical 
Review xiv 211 (article by H. Richards on the use of tpaywdds 
and κωμῳδός). 

128 29 As Hammer has pointed out, the mannered inversion 
τῶν Περσῶν τῆς ἀπληστίας is characteristic of the 7. ἑρμ. (and, it may 
be added, of the z. vw. as well): cp. p. 78 1. ro, p. 96 1. 24, p. 106 1. 2, 
Ρ. 116]. 4, Ρ. 124]. 5, Ρ. 126]. τ9; Ρ. wOAIL ne, lela Wne Orelee 15 
the more awkward that a preposition governing the genitive is used: 
contrast p. 146 1. 19 ἐπὶ τῆς ἀπληστίας τῶν Περσῶν. 

130 3 The fragments of Sophron have been collected by Kaibel 
Comicorum Graecorum Fragmenta p\). 152—18t, and by Botzon in his 
Sophroneorum Mimorum Reliquiae. Norden (Kunstprosa\ pp. 46—48) 


NOTES 235 


gives some account of Sophron’s rhythmical prose, and comments 
on this revival of interest in it during the rst century a.p. (the period 
to which he assigns the z. épu.), when composition with a strongly 
marked rhythm was much affected by the Greek rhetoricians. Suidas 
says: Σώφρων Συρακούσιος, ᾿Αγαθοκλέους καὶ Δαμνασυλλίδος- τοῖς δὲ 
χρόνοις ἣν κατὰ Ξέρξην καὶ Εὐριπίδην, καὶ ἔγραψε μίμους ἀνδρείους καὶ 
μίμους γυναικείους: εἰσὶ δὲ καταλογάδην, διαλέκτῳ Δωρίδι. καὶ φασὶ 
Πλάτωνα τὸν φιλόσοφον ἀεὶ αὐτοῖς ἐντυγχάνειν, ὡς καὶ καθεύδειν ἐπ᾽ 
αὐτῶν ἔσθ᾽ ὅτε, viz. “Sophron of Syracuse, the son of Agathocles and 
Damnasyllis, was contemporary with Xerxes and Euripides and wrote 
mimes for men and mimes for women; they are in prose and in the 
Doric dialect. It is said that the philosopher Plato was always 
reading them,—in fact, that he sometimes slept with them under his 
pillow.” In this passage, the mention of Xerxes seems to point to 
confusion between Epicharmus and Sophron, whose date may be 
inferred from the fact that his son Xenarchus lived under the tyrant 
Dionysius. By μῖμοι ἀνδρεῖοι are meant such subjects as the Τέροντες, 
‘Adtets, Ἄγγελος, etc.) ; by μῖμοι γυναικεῖοι such as the ᾿Ισθμιαάζουσαι, 
TlevGepa, etc. In the Poetics 1 7 Aristotle says: οὐδὲν yap av ἔχοιμεν 
ὀνομάσαι κοινὸν τοὺς Σώφρονος καὶ Bevapxov μίμους καὶ τοὺς ΣΣωκρατικοὺς 
λόγους, οὐδὲ εἴ τις διὰ τριμέτρων ἢ ἐλεγείων ἢ τῶν ἄλλων τινῶν τῶν 
τοιούτων ποιοῖτο τὴν μίμησιν (Ωρ. 5. H. Butcher’s edition, pp. 142, 143). 
The following sections of the π. ἕρμ. refer to Sophron: S§ 128, 147, 
151, 153, 156, 162 (in ὃ 156 his μῖμοι are called δράματα). Cp. 
L. Hirzel Der Dialog τ 20 ff. 

130 τό For the humour of Lysias, see Jebb’s Artic Ovators 1 
pp. 184, 185, 1904, and Blass Azt. Lereds. 1 pp. 398, 632. Blass 
Griech. Bereds. p. 5% may also be consulted, especially with regard 
to Maslovius’ (Maslow’s) proposed substitution of ᾿Αριστοφάνους for 
᾿Αριστοτέλους in this passage: as he points out, prose-writers (not 
poets) are here in question. 


130 17 Cp. such English examples as: ‘‘Like a man made after 
supper of a cheese-paring: when a’ was naked, he was, for all the 
world, like a forked radish, with a head fantastically carved upon it 
with a knife,” Second Part of King Henry IV, Act 111 Se. 2. 


132 6 οὖν (if the reading is right) must mean denzgue. 


132 7, 8 Hom. Odyss. 1x 369 Οὖὗτιν ἐγὼ πύματον ἔδομαι μετὰ 
ois ἕταροισι, | τοὺς δ᾽ ἄλλους πρόσθεν: τὸ δέ τοι ξεινήϊον éorar.—lt 


should be noticed that P gives ἕένειον, both here and in § 152. 


236 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


182 13° Xen. Anad. γι 1, 13 ἐνταῦθα κρότος ἦν πολύς, καὶ 
οἱ Παφλαγόνες ἤροντο εἰ καὶ γυναῖκες συνεμάχοντο αὐτοῖς- οἱ δ᾽ ἔλεγον 
ὅτι αὗται καὶ αἱ τρεψάμεναι εἶεν βασιλέα ἐκ τοῦ στρατοπέδου. 

134 7 The literal translation probably is ‘in the writings of 
Xenophon’: cp. p. 152 1. 5, p. 80 1. 18, p. 94 1. 28. It has, indeed, 
been maintained that in later Greek παρὰ c. dat. 15 -- ὑπὸ c. genit. ; 
but usually, if not always, the local sense will be found to be 
prominent, e.g. Dionys. Hal. de Thucyd. c. 23 ov6 ai διασωζόμεναι 
παρὰ πᾶσιν, ὡς ἐκείνων οὖσαι TOV ἀνδρῶν, πιστεύονται :᾿ id. 7b. C. 39 
τοῦτο δὲ ὅμοιόν ἐστι τῷ λέγειν ὅτι παρὰ τοῖς τυράννοις οὐ μισοῦνται 
τυραννοι. 

1349 More than one example of this kind of pleasantry will be 
found in the opening scene of the A/erchant of Venice. 


134 13 Finckh would expunge ὥσπερ καὶ in 1. 13 and ὥσπερ in 
1. 14, and substitute ὥσπερ for ὡσπερεὶ in |. 15. 


184 τὸ Possibly P’s παραδείξομαι should be preserved, as another 
instance of that curious love of variety which gives ἐπαινεσόμεθα in 
§ 292 but ἐπαινέσομεν in ὃ 295, περὶ κακοζηλίας in § 189 but περὶ τὴν 
λέξιν in § 188. 

184 26 Xen. Anadb. 1π 1, 31 ἀλλὰ τούτῳ ye οὔτε τῆς Βοιωτίας 
προσήκει οὐδὲν οὔτε τῆς Ἑλλάδος παντάπασιν, ἐπεὶ ἐγὼ αὐτὸν εἶδον 
ὥσπερ Λυδὸν ἀμφότερα τὰ ὦτα τετρυπημένον. καὶ εἶχεν οὕτως. 

136 4 Weil says that he would rather see the shield of the sleep- 
ing Amazon under her head than on her head (“ich sahe den Schild 
der schlafenden Amazone lieber unter ihrem Kopfe ὑπὸ τῇ κεφαλῇ 
als auf ihrem Kopfe ἐπὶ τῇ κεφαλῇ, LVeue Jahrb. fur Philol. und 
“σας. LUXX11 705); and so he would read ὑπό But the alternatives 
are not fully grouped ; and the fact is overlooked that a shield might 
be an uncomfortable pillow even for an Amazon. In late as in early 
Greek ἐπὶ with the dative may mean simply deszde, as in Homer’s at 
δὲ νέμονται | πὰρ Κόρακος πέτρῃ ἐπί τε κρήνῃ ᾿Αρεθούσῃ (Odyss. XIII 
407), or οἱ δ᾽ ἀγορὰς ἀγόρευον ἐπὶ Πριάμοιο θύρῃσι | πάντες ὁμηγερέες, 
ἠμὲν νέοι ἠδὲ γέροντες, Where it is certainly not implied that the old 
men and the young were seated ov the doors.—In ὃ 138 and ὃ 137 
the author shows a clear perception of the fact that style owes as 
much to what is left unsaid as to what is said,—that a pointed 
brevity is most effective. 


136 13 Or “the exemption of his territory from further pillage,” 
as Mr Dakyns more neatly renders it in his ‘Translation of 


NOTES 237 


Xenophon’s Works. The full sentence in Xen. Ana’. 1 2, 27 is: 
μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ἐπεὶ συνεγένοντο ἀλλήλοις, Συέννεσις μὲν ἔδωκε Κύρῳ 
χρήματα πολλὰ εἰς τὴν oTpatiav, Κῦρος δὲ ἐκείνῳ δῶρα ἃ νομίζεται παρὰ 
βασιλεῖ τίμια, ἵππον χρυσοχάλινον καὶ στρεπτὸν χρυσοῦν καὶ ψέλια καὶ 
ἀκινάκην χρυσοῦν καὶ στολὴν Περσικήν, καὶ τὴν χώραν μηκέτι διαρπά- 
ζεσθαι, τὰ δὲ ἡρπασμένα ἀνδράποδα, nv που ἐντυγχάνωσιν, ἀπολαμβανειν. 

136 25 Cp. the repetition of ‘till I die’ in Tennyson’s 77Ζαμ, 
or of ‘the love of’ in the Dedication of his /dy/s, or of ‘all made of’ 
in As You Like It v 2. 

136 24 The fragments of Sappho quoted in the π. ἕρμ. are for 
the most part given in an abbreviated or allusive form and without 
much regard to verse-arrangement. Perhaps, therefore, it is better 
to let them remain imbedded in the text, rather than attempt to 
arrange them metrically. For the present fragment, see H. Weir 
Smyth Greek Melic Poets p. 35 and H. T. Wharton Sappho p. 145. 


138 - dewornras. Spengel suggests δεινότητα. But cp. p. 132 
I, 72 fob MSO IL 21 


138 4 ἐπιχαρίτως : in support of his emendation, Finckh com- 
pares p. 130 l. 9. 

138 6 For this passage, see H. Weir Smyth Greek Melic Poets 
PP. 34, 249, 250; and H. T. Wharton’s Sappho pp. 136—138. 


138 12 See H. Weir Smyth of. cit. pp. 20, 220, 221, with the 
reference there given to Hesiod Of. e¢ D. 582 ff. 


140 τ Whilamowitz-Moellendorff (Hermes xxxiv p. 629) takes 
the reference to be to the dros, or long-eared owl, and quotes 
Aristot. Hist. An. vit 597b 23 ἔστι δὲ κόβαλος καὶ μιμητὴς Kat 
ἀντορχούμενος ἁλίσκεται. Weil suggests κακ κόλακος (‘and of flatterers 
bred’), but the plural τὰ μὴ συνήθη ὀνόματα seems to favour 
Wilamowitz’ emendation. Cp. Aristoph. Vesp. 42 ff. for κόρακος 
converted into κόλακος by the lisping Alcibiades. 

1407 Cp. H. T. Wharton’s Sappho pp. 131, 132. 

140 to 6 λαμπρότερος: it has been suggested that τῆς σελήνης 
should be supplied. Spengel, however, proposes λαμπρότατος, just as 
on p. 76 |. 17 he proposes μικρόταται for μικρότεραι. See, however, 
for the confusion of the comparative and superlative in later Greek, 
J. H. Moulton ‘Grammatical Notes from the Papyn’ (Classical Review 
XIV 439), and cp. Blass ew Zest. Grammar (H. St J. Thackeray’s 
translation) pp. 33, 141. Cp. Mod. Gk 6 λαμπρότερος (superl.). 


238 DEMETRIGS ΟΝ 5ΖΎΖΕ 


140 13 Cp. Kaibel Comécorum Graecorum Fragmenta p. 159. 
There is some similarity in Pope’s humorous comparison: “ Millions 
and millions on these banks he views, | Thick as the stars of night, 
or morning dews, | As thick as bees o’er vernal blossoms fly, | As 
thick as eggs at Ward in pillory.” (Dunciad, Book 111.) 


140 τό διαπαίζουσα: late in this sense,—Josephus, Plutarch, 
Diog. Laert., etc. 


140 19 Sappho’s lines are thus written and arranged in Smyth’s 
Greek Melic Poets p. 33: “You δὴ τὸ μέλαθρον | Ὑμήναον | ἀέρρετε 
τέκτονες ἄνδρες: | Ὑμήναον. | γάμβρος ἐσέρχεται ἴσσος “Apeut, | avdpos 
μεγάλω πόλυ μείζων. See also Η. IT. Wharton’s Sappho pp. 130, 
Bike 

140 23 Some ancient Zé/émague seems to be in question. 
W. Christ (Grech. Litt.’ p. 592) suggests παρὰ Τηλέφῳ, meaning a 
grammarian Telephus of Pergamus who lived under the Antonines 
(cp. Miller & &. G. 111 634). 


142 2 Cp. Don Juan c. τ (of College) “For there one learns— 
‘tis not for me to boast; | Though I acquired—but I pass over 
that.” 


142 3 xal...... δὲ occurs also on p. 76 1. 20 and p. 148 |. 25.—azo 
στίχου ἀλλοτρίου: see Introd. p. 63 supra. ‘The reference is, of 
course, to the art of parody. Cp. Aristot. δέ. 11 11, 6. 


142 7 κωμῳδεῖσθαι : specifically Attic meaning (κωμῳδεῖν used in 
the same sense as σκώπτειν three lines above). 


142 τι Usener (Δ λεῖη. Mus. xxi11 336) has pointed out that 
δελφύι, not δελῴοῖ, would be the locative form corresponding. to 
deAdis. He suggests ἀδελφὸν παιδίον ὗμιν a κύων φέρε. The 
‘allegory’ probably lies, as he says, in the use of παιδίον for 
σκυλάκιον. 

142 12—16 For these passages οἵ Sophron, see (besides the 
references given to Kaibel at the foot of the Translation) Botzon 
Sophr. Mim. Relig. pp. 15, 9. 

142 τὸ Cp. ὃ 130 supra, where the same passage is quoted. 

144 3 Boulias: cp. Kaibel Comic. Graec. Fragm. pp. 171, 172: 
“ Bulias non rhetor sed iudex ἀναβαλλόμενος ἀεὶ καὶ ὑπερτιθέμενος Tas 
κρίσεις in proverbio est: Βουλίας δικάζει Zenob. vulg. 1. 79. homo 
est nomine suo semper condigne faciens.” 


NOTES 239 


144 4 See Meineke Καὶ C. G. iv 78 for “᾿Ανατιθεμένη ἢ Meo- 
onvia. —For Menander in general, cp. Croiset Lz¢t. Grecgue ΠῚ pp. 
611—620 and G. Guizot’s Ménandre. 


144 11 According to this view Macaulay, by repeating the word 
‘gave, constructs a more elegant sentence than Hume in the 
following example: (1) Macaulay: “The Puritans hated bear-baiting, 
not because it gave pain to the bear, but because it gave pleasure to 
the spectators” (A/istory of England, c. 2); (2) Hume: “Even bear- 
baiting was esteemed heathenish and unchristian; the sport of it, 
not the inhumanity gave offence” (zstory of England, c. 62). 


144 22 ἔπρισεν: Cobet (Collectanea Critica p. 237) suggested 
ἔπριεν, which he thinks was written ἔπρειεν and so corrupted into 
ἔσπειρεν. But the aorist is better, as there is a designed uniformity 
of tense and sound. 

144 24 ἐπιπληθύωνται: this verb does not occur elsewhere in 
extant Greek literature. 

144 27 Cp. note referring to p. 104 |. 30 supra. 

144 28 ‘The words of Aristotle (Ast. Anim. 1X 32) are : γηράσ- 
κουσι δὲ τοῖς ἀετοῖς TO ῥύγχος αὐξάνεται TO ἄνω γαμψούμενον ἀεὶ μᾶλλον, 
καὶ τέλος λιμῷ ἀποθνήσκουσιν. 

146 2 ff. Another fragment of Egyptian lore. Cp. Plutarch Zs. 
et Osir. 63 ai δ᾽ ἐν τοῖς ὄμμασιν αὐτοῦ (sc. τοῦ aidovpov) κόραι πληροῦ- 
σθαι μὲν καὶ πλατύνεσθαι δοκοῦσιν ἐν πανσελήνῳ, λεπτύνεσθαι δὲ καὶ 
μαραυγεῖν ἐν ταῖς μειώσεσι τοῦ ἄστρου. 

146 ὃ The author clearly has scenes, and lines, of comedy in 
mind throughout §§ 159, 160, τότ. With 1. 13, cp. Aristoph. Aves 
486: διὰ ταῦτ᾽ ap’ ἔχων καὶ viv ὥσπερ βασιλεὺς ὃ μέγας διαβάσκει | ἐπὶ 
τῆς κεφαλῆς τὴν κυρβασίαν τῶν ὀρνίθων μόνος ὀρθήν. 

146 19 Aristoph. Ach. ὃς παρετίθει δ᾽ ἡμῖν ὅλους | ἐκ κριβάνου 
βοῦς. 

146 23 Cp. ὃ 127 supra, with the references there given. 


146 24 See H. T. Wharton’s Sappho p. 153. The ‘commentator 
on Hermogenes’ there referred to is Gregorius Corinthius (Walz; 
Rhet. Graeci, vil 2, 1236). 

146 29 “Epws, written by a later hand in P, is due to a confused 
repetition of ἔρωτες and anticipation of "Epwros. 


148 15 Cp. H. Weir Smyth, Greek MWelic Poets, p. cxv. 


240 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


148 τό aypoxov: specifically Attic word. Also found in § 217. 


148 27 ff. Cp. Hor. Ars Poet. 231 “effutire leves indigna tragoedia 
versus, | ut festis matrona moveri lussa diebus, | intererit satyris 
paulum pudibunda protervis. | non ego inornata et dominantia nomina 
solum | verbaque, Pisones, satyrorum scriptor amabo.” 


148 28 & 31 σάτυρον : the plural is more usual than the singular 
in this sense of ‘satyric play’; cp. Aristoph. Zhesm. 157 ὅταν σατύροις 
τοίνυν ποιῇς, καλεῖν ἐμέ. For the singular, Mr H. Richards (Classical 
Review XIV 205) quotes C. 7. G. 2758 iv as well as this passage of 
the π᾿ ἕρμ. In P’s marginal note, οἱ σάτυροι will be observed. 


150 5 The ‘far-gleaming pouch’ may perhaps have been a 
cant expression for a protuberant body. Casaubon conjectured 6 
Τηλαύγους, comparing Athenaeus v 220 A πεφύκασι δ᾽ οἱ πλεῖστοι 
τῶν φιλοσόφων τῶν κωμικῶν κακήγοροι εἶναι, εἴ ye καὶ Αἰσχίνης ὁ 
Σωκρατικὸς ἐν μὲν τῷ Τηλαύγει Κριτόβουλον τὸν Κρίτωνος ἐπ᾽ ἀμαθίᾳ 
καὶ ῥυπαρότητι βίου κωμῳδεῖ, τὸν δὲ Τηλαύγην αὐτὸν ἱματίου μὲν φορή- 
σεως καθ᾽ ἡμέραν ἡμιωβόλιον κναφεῖ τελοῦντα μισθόν, κωδίῳ δὲ ἐζωσμένον 
καὶ τὰ ὑποδήματα σπαρτίοις ἐνημμένον σαπροῖς. 

Telauges as a proper name occurs in § 291 infra: there is here a 
play on the personal name. 

150 4 Athenaeus Iv 158B καὶ Κράτης δ᾽ ὁ Θηβαῖος ἔλεγεν: μὴ 
πρὸ φακῆς λοπάδ᾽ αὐξων | εἰς στάσιν ἀμμε βάλῃς. Crates the Theban 
was a Cynic philosopher, a pupil of Diogenes, and a contemporary of 
Theophrastus. He wrote in prose and verse, praising simplicity of 
life. ποιητικὴ here may refer to some satirical ‘ Poetic’ of his com- 
position, or to his poetry in general. Cp. § 259. 

150 6 ὡς τὸ πλέον, ‘for the most part’: only here in this 
particular form. 

150 6,7 Cp. “quamquam ridentem dicere verum | quid vetat ?” 
(Hor. Sat. 1 1, 24). Ridendo praecipere is as important a principle 
as laudando praecipere. A true word may well be spoken in jest. 


150 8 “Nothing,” says Goethe, “is more significant of men’s 
character than what they find laughable.” George Eliot, who quotes 
this remark in her Zssay on Heine, would say “culture” rather than 
“« character.” 


150 το Apparently some such word as ἐκάλει or εἶπε has fallen 
out before Πηλέα. The correction Πηλέα is confirmed by Athen. 1x 
383 ς ἐπιτιμῶντες δέ τινι (οἱ μάγειροι) φασίν: μὴ δεῖν τὸν Οἰνέα Πηλέα 


NOTES 241 


a ε 3 an 
ποιεῖν, and by Eustath. ad 71. p. 772 ἡ δὲ τοιαύτη κατ᾽ οἶνον ἔννοια 

ὶ Ὁ ἥρωος Οἰνέ ἔφην lt λόγον ἀστεῖον ἐπὶ καπήλῳ οἶνον 
περὶ τοῦ ypwos Οἰνέως ἔφηνε κα γ τεῖον ὶ nr 

ε ἈΝ al 4 

ταράττοντι, WS Kal TOV τρυγίαν συνεμπολᾶν. ἤκουσε yap ποθεν εὐτραπέ. 
λως τό: μὴ ποίει τὸν Οἰνέα Πηλέα, τουτέστι μὴ τὸν τρυγίαν κυκῶν καὶ τῷ 
λως 76° μὴ ηλέα, μὴ τὸν τρυγ 5 

“ Ν / Ν 5 ε > / > n 
κρητῆρι παραμιγνὺς μετάβαλλε τὸν οἶνον ws εἰς πηλόν, ᾧ δοκεῖ παρωνο- 


μάσθαι παιγνημόνως ὃ Πηλεύς. 


150 15 Cp. Seneca, Dial. 1|΄ (de Constantia Sapientis) c. 17, 
“‘Chrysippus ait quendam indignatum, quod illum aliquis vervecem 
marinum dixerat” (quoted by Schneider), and Diog. Laert. vir 1, 2 
καὶ ᾿Απολλώνιος δέ φησιν 6 Τύριος ὅτι ἰσχνὸς ἢν (Ζήνων), ὑπομήκης, 
μελάγχρους, ὅθεν τις αὐτὸν εἶπεν Αἰγυπτίαν κληματίδα, καθά φησι 
Χρύσιππος ἐν πρώτῳ ΠΙαροιμιῶν (quoted by Finckh and Liers).—The 
seeming dependence of this passage of the 7. ἑρμ. on Chrysippus is 
another indication of comparatively late date. 

For similar expressions in English, cp. ‘corn-stalk’ of a New- 
South-Wales man, ‘blue-nose’ of a Nova Scotian, etc. 


150 τό, 17 Victorius brackets τὸν ἐν τῇ θαλάσσῃ as a gloss on 
θαλάσσιον. But there seems a special allusion to the follies of the 
landsman when he finds himself in a boat. With πρόβατον cp. 
vervex: a ‘sheep at sea’ would be specially helpless and foolish. 
Aristoph. Vu. 1203 ἀριθμός, πρόβατ᾽ ἄλλως. Sophron is thought by 
Ahrens to have coined a phrase προβάτου προβάτερον, οἰὸς οἰότερον 
(Kaibel C. G. ΚΖ p. 173). It is unnecessary to suppose that a /ish is 
here meant by θαλάσσιον πρόβατον. 


150 21 Aristot. AeZ. Π| 2, 13 has: κάλλος δὲ ὀνόματος τὸ μέν, 
ὥσπερ Λικύμνιος λέγει, ἐν τοῖς ψόφοις ἢ τῷ σημαινομένῳ, Kal αἶσχος δὲ 
ὡσαύτως. 

150 24 Th. Gomperz (Philodem und die asthetischen Schriften 
der Flerculanischen Bibliothek, p. 71) suggests ἀνθοφόρου χλόας, and 
compares Eurip. Cyc. 541 ἀνθηρᾷ χλόῃ. 

150 26 Any English learner of Italian who has had lessons from 
a good teacher will remember the delight with which the true 
pronunciation of words lke donna and della was expounded. Such 


delight we may safely assume the author of the z. ἑρμ. to have taken 
in the names ᾿Αννοῶν and Καλλίστρατος. 


152 1 The expression οἱ ᾿Αττικοὶ seems to betoken a late stand- 


point, though οἱ ᾿Αττικοὶ ῥήτορες (perhaps an interpolation) occurs in 
Aristot. Ahef. 1 11, 16 and οἱ ᾿Αθήνησι ῥήτορες in Rhet. U1 17, το. 


R. 16 


242 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


At all events, the extract from Theophrastus (§ 173) does not seem 
to extend as far as here.—On the question of the grammatical forms, 
see Kuhner Gramm. d. gr. Sprache’ 1 pp. 394, 395; Meisterhans 
Gramm. da. att. Inschriften* p. 107 (the confirmation here given to 
the statement in the zw. ἑρμ. is noteworthy); G. Meyer Griech. 
Gramm.’ p. 321. 


152 3 About ἀρχαῖοι there is something of the notion conveyed 
by ‘ prisci’ homines. 


1527 This use of διά, to denote the material of which a thing 
is formed, is late—perhaps not earlier than Diodorus and Dionys. 
Halic. Other instances on p. 76 1. 10 (which should be compared 
with p. 86 |. 23, p. 176 1. 25), p. 74 1. 18, p. 104 1. 12. 


152 τό Cp. Theocr. xv 88 ἐκκναισεῦντι πλατειάσδοισαι ἅπαντα. 


15217 The general standpoint here is surely late. The past 
tense is itself significant. 


152 20 Spengel suggests ἄλλοις ; but see ἢ. on p. go I. 18 supra. 
If any change were to be suggested, it might be (with Goeller) that 
of παρατεχνολογείσθω to παρατετεχνολογήσθω (cp. λελέχθω § 41). 

152 24 Gennadius suggests τόπου in place of τρόπου. 


152 25 Dionysius treats of the γλαφυρὰ σύνθεσις in his de Comp. 
Verb. The author of the π. ἑρμ. must, therefore, either be of earlier 
date than Dionysius, or (if later) have been ignorant, or have feigned 
ignorance, of his work. 


152 29 (ΟΡ. p. 126 1. 5 supra. 


152 30 For διακρίνοι cp. ὃ 1, where it means ‘differentiate,’ 
‘distinguish,’ ‘mark out.’ 


1548 C. Miller (Aragm. Hist. Graec. 1 p. 245) suggests that 
the reference is to Xenophanes. The ‘ Dicaearchus’ in question is 
no doubt Dicaearchus Messenius and not the so-called ‘ Pseudo- 
Dicaearchus’ (for whom see Axncient Boeotians Ὁ. 10); and Dicae- 
archus Messenius would be little, if any, earlier than Demetrius of 
Phalerum. 

15415 Lit. ‘for the former (i.e. τὸ ἕδραν ἔχειν) is plain. and 
vehement, while length is elevated.’ 

15418 The few words here quoted are meant to indicate the 
whole of the passage: οὐκοῦν ὅταν μέν τις μουσϊκῇ παρέχῃ καταυλεῖν 


\ a a a N A ” 7 ὃ \ / By a Ry uA τς 
και κατάχειν ΤῊ 5 ψυχῆς διὰ TWV WTWV WOT ED ta χώνης ας νυν δὴ Ὥμεις 


NOTES 243 


ἐλέγομεν τὰς γλυκείας τε καὶ μαλακὰς καὶ θρηνώδεις ἁρμονίας, καὶ 
μινυρίζων τε καὶ γεγανωμένος ὑπὸ τῆς δῆς διατελῇ τὸν βίον ὅλον, οὗτος 
τὸ μὲν πρῶτον, εἴ τι θυμοειδὲς εἶχεν, ὥσπερ σίδηρον ἐμάλαξεν καὶ χρήσι- 
pov ἐξ ἀχρήστου καὶ σκληροῦ ἐποίησεν: ὅταν δ᾽ ἐπέχων μὴ avin κτλ. 
(Plat. ep. πὶ 411 A, Β. Hammer (Pii/ologus xxxvi 357) defends 
ἐπ᾿ ἄμφω as meaning “nach beiden Richtungen findet man ἐν τῷ 
περὶ μουσικῆς λόγῳ des Plato, dass er γλαφυρός ist, vgl. Aps. 383, 12: 
ὅταν ἐπ᾽ ἄμφω ἀποδείξῃς.᾽ 

154 24 Spengel adopts the reading ἐξελεῖς, though he points out 
that the author has the regular future aipyow in ὃ 29: cp. 88 57, 214, 
268, 299. 

15428 The full passage in Plat. Rep. 11 399 D is λύρα δή σοι, ἢν 
δ᾽ ἐγώ, καὶ κιθάρα λείπεται, καὶ κατὰ πόλιν χρήσιμα" καὶ ad κατ᾽ ἀγροὺς 
τοῖς νομεῦσι σύριγξ ay τις εἴη. 

156 το ὀνομάζω is a conjecture of Gale for ὀνομάζει as given in 
P 1741. Possibly the third person singular may be defended on the 
ground that τις is to be supplied (cp. 7. vw. p. 171), or that some 
particular authority such as Archedemus (see note referring to p. 86 
1. 13) is meant. In other passages (e.g. § 94) the plural is used, in 
order to indicate more than one authority: here Victorius translates 
‘nominant,’ though reading ὀνομάζει. 

156 13 Some of these examples of affectation are probably ἢ 
drawn, as Norden (Kwastprosa 1 148) points out, from the Asiatic 
writers of the third century B.c. 


156 15 ‘The name of the mother of Alexander the Great being 
Olympias. 

156 τὸ ηδύχροον : perhaps ‘sweet-complexioned,’ just as in 
English ‘sweet-breasted’ has been applied to the nightingale. 


156 21 λεπταῖς: see for this emendation by Radermacher, 
Rhein. Mus. xiv 625. Wailamowitz, Hermes, ΧΧΧΙΝ 629, suggests 
Aryetars. Norden (Auzstfrosa 1 148) calls attention to the Ionic 
rhythm in ὑπεσύριζε πίτυς αὔραις (υὙ)ὁ-- --υυὐσυ ---). 

156 22 Hammer (p. 72 of his dissertation) thinks that Spengel 
is night in his query “ quidni τῆς λέξεως ἢ The genitive is, indeed, 
found in other similar passages (such as p. 158 1. 3 and p. 130 1. 9); 
but we must allow for our author’s love of variety (e.g. p. 158 1. 3, 
τοσάδε for the usual τοσαῦτα). Here, too, the concurrence of sigmas 
may have been avoided. See ἢ. on p. 134 1. τό. 


τό--2 


244 DEMETRIOS ON STYLE 


156 25 wraders. Sotades lived in the time of Ptolemy Phila- 
delphus, whose court he visited ; and the use of the term ‘Sotadean’ 
for feeble and affected rhythms is probably of still later date. 
F. Podhorsky’s dissertation De Versu Sotadeo (in ‘ Dissertationes 
Philologae Vindobonenses,’ v pp. to6—184) may be consulted, 
together with Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 4 and Quintil. 1x 4, 
6 and 90. A schol. on 71. ΧΧΙ 133 says: οὗτος ὃ στίχος μετατιθέμενος 
᾿Ιωνικῶς γίνεται ἀπὸ μείζονος: “ σείων μελίην Πηλιάδα δεξιὸν κατ᾽ ὦμον. 
ἀλλ᾽ ἡ σύνθεσις καὶ τὸν ἄρρενα τόνον τεθήλυκεν : cp. Athen. XIV 620 E 
ὁ δὲ ᾿Ιωνικὸς λόγος τὰ Σωτάδου καὶ τὰ πρὸ τούτου ᾿Ιωνικὰ καλούμενα 
ποιήματα κτλ. The fragments οἵ Sotades have been collected by 
G. Hermann, Elem. Doctr. Metr. Ὁ. 444 ff. 


158 τ μεταμεμορφωμένῳ : late,—Philo, New Test., Lucian ete. 
158 6 The passage of Lysias (de caede Eratosth., ad init.) is: 


“ SS > Neer, ~ Ν Ν “δ εκ > ΄ a AN 
πρῶτον μὲν οὖν, ὦ ἄνδρες (δεῖ yap καὶ ταῦθ᾽ ὑμῖν διηγήσασθαι), οἰκίδιόν 
A " > ΄ a \ 
ἐστί μοι διπλοῦν, ἴσα ἔχον TA ἄνω τοῖς κάτω, κατὰ THY γυναικωνῖτιν καὶ 
Ν ἊΝ 3 “ > \ \ Ν ᾽ὔ > vA ς- κα ε ΄ > Ν 
κατὰ τὴν ἀνδρωνῖτιν. ἐπειδὴ δὲ τὸ παιδίον ἐγένετο ἡμῖν, ἡ μήτηρ αὐτὸ 
52 7 7 N ΄ G7 ΄ ΄ ΄ N a ΄ 
ἐθήλαζεν- ἵνα δὲ μή, ὁπότε λούεσθαι δέοι, κινδυνεύῃ κατὰ τῆς κλίμακος 


΄ DEN Su EY ὃ ΄ ε SS “ ΄ λ 
καταβαίνουσα, eyo μεν ava LTWHIV, αι O€ γύυναικες κατω, κτλ. 


158 ὃ For the effective use of familiar words, see 2). /. pp. 10, 
15. Hammer ingeniously suggests that in this line πάντων is a 
misreading of πᾶν (cp. 1. 16), the circumflex having been mistaken 
for an abbreviation of the syllable των. In P 1741, however, the 
corruption seems to have been the other way about. 


158 18 i.e. the obscurity of Heracleitus is due chiefly to asyn- 
deton: cp. Aristot. A/ef. 11 5, 6. Dionysius (de Comp. Verb. 
c. 22) says of the αὐστηρὰ ἁρμονία as seen in ancient writings: 
ἀγχίστροφός ἐστι περὶ τὰς πτώσεις, ποικίλη περὶ τοὺς σχηματισμούς, 
ὀλιγοσύνδεσμος, ἄναρθρος, ἐν πολλοῖς ὑπεροπτικὴ τῆς ἀκολουθίας, 
ἥκιστα ἀνθηρά, μεγαλόφρων, αὐθέκαστος, ἀκόμψευτος, τὸν ἀρχαϊσμὸν 
καὶ τὸν πῖνον ἔχουσα κάλλος On the subject of ἀμφιβολία, or 
ambiguity, see also Theon’s Progymn. pp. 79—81 (Spengel Pet. 
Gr.) and Quintilian vst. Ov. vu 9. 


158 24 Philemon: W. Christ Gesch. d. gr. Litt.’ p. 316, Croiset 
Litt. Gr. 1π| pp. 609, 610. Date, 361—262 B.C. 


158 27 Nauck Zrag. Graec. Fragm.’ p. 864 reckons this line 
among tragic ‘adespota,’ but the context favours Meineke’s ascription 
to Menander. Cobet /Vov. Lect. p. 92 suggested φιλώ for φίλε, thus 


NOTES 245 


multiplying the verbs unduly perhaps; Nauck (Rhezn. Aus. v1 468), 
φίλαι. 

160 3, 4 lit. ‘along with the conjunctions you will infuse a 
plentiful lack of emotion into the line,’ cp. p. 190 1. 19, which may 
suggest ἀπάθειαν ἅμα here. (The author of the 7. ἑρμ. does not seem 
to have disapproved of σὺν in composition with another preposition, 
ΠΡ. Ρ- 78 1. 14. Ρ. τόδ ]. το. 80 ἴατ, therefore, the conjecture 
συνεμβαλεῖς appears possible.) 

160 7 ‘This interesting passage shows that the Young Samuel of 
their literature had impressed the imagination of the Greeks. The 
word κύκνος was substituted for κύκλος in Eurip. /oz 162 by Victorius, 
with the aid of the present passage. 


160 12 διαμόρφωσις : late,—Plut., Clem. Alex., etc. Liddell and 
Scott note the sense of style or character (of oratory) as cited from 
Dem. Phal.; but the reference seems to be to this passage of the 
a. €pu. The idea here appears to be that of ‘construction or 
arrangement of the episode’ (what the actors call ‘ business’) devised 
by the dramatist with an eye to the actor; stage-directions, in fact, 
expressed or implied. 

160 18 τὴν Θρᾷκην κατεστρέψατο occurs In Demosth. ΟΖ. xi 1. 


160 22 ἀπεκατέστησεν: cp. J. H. Moulton’s Grammatical Notes 
from the Papyri, Classical Review xv p. 35 and p. 435. The varia- 
bility there noted by Mr Moulton is illustrated in this treatise, 
ἀνέμνησεν appearing in this section, but ἠνέμνησεν in section 297. 

160 27 φεύγειν: for the infin., see ἢ. on p. 220 supra. The 
desire for variety explains φεύγειν in ὃ 204 by the side of φευκτέον in 
§ 207 and φευγέτω in § 208. 

160 28 For Philistus, see Dionys. Hal. Zp. ad Pomp. c. 5 and 
D. H. p. 174; also π. vw. p. 237. 

162 5 It is difficult to determine whether ἂν should be added 
(here and on pp. 168 1. τό, 1841. 5, 194 1. 21, 200 1. 9) in accord- 
ance with classical usage and the usage of this author elsewhere. In 
the present state of our knowledge of later Greek there is perhaps 
some advantage in giving prominence to such aberrations from 
accepted usage. Cp. Aristoph. Av. 180, Eurip. Andr. 9209. 

16210 The natural order of words is appropriate to the χαρακτὴρ 
ἰσχνός, just as hyperbaton suits the χαρακτὴρ peyadorperyns.—For 
Victorius’ highly probable emendation, cp. 1. 18 τὸ φυσικὸν εἶδος τῆς 


246 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


tafews.—Dionysius states his views with regard to the natural order 
of words in de Comp. Verb. c. 4: cp. D. H. pp. 12, 13. 


162 16 δοκιμάζω : late (Josephus, Plutarch, etc.) in the sense of 
‘approve’ which it bears here and in § 15. 


162 27 αὐτόθεν : ‘at once,’ ‘suddenly,’ cp. 7. vf. p. 195. In 
§§ 32, 78, 122 the meaning 15 ‘ of itself,’ ‘springing from itself.’ 


162 29 If ἂν is right, εἶεν or the like may be supplied: ὡσπερανεὶ 
πολλὰ a. ἔχ. Should possibly be read. 


164 2 ἀσημείωτος : late—Philo, and an inscription of Roman 
imperial times. The verb σημειοῦν occurs in Theophrastus, but the 
derivative forms are late. 


164 4 The treatment of σαφήνεια is brief, but to the point. 
The 7. ἑρμ. is more directly concerned with the rhetorical graces 
than with that cardinal virtue of clearness which Aristotle rightly 
places first in his definition of style. But his own writing shows 
that the author was quite alive to the importance of lucidity. 


1645 As Aristotle (οί. ΠῚ 12, 6: quoted on p. 39 supra) 
says, style ‘fails in clearness both when it is prolix and when it is 
condensed.” The latter case is, of course, Horace’s “brevis esse 
laboro: obscurus fio” ; but the lapses of the plain style from clear- 
ness belong rather to the former category,—they arise chiefly from 
‘rambling.’ 

164 8 Cp. ὃ 5 for elevation as due to long members. 

1649 P has πρέπον ἡρώων here, but πρέπον ἥρωσιν in ὃ 5. In 
§ 96 P has μεταξὺ Ῥλληνικοῖς ὀνόμασιν. 

164 to The triple division of Comedy belongs to the Alex- 
andrian age. Like the reference to Menander and Philemon in 
§ 193, it suggests a later date than that of Demetrius Phalereus. 


164 12 κώλοις τριμέτροις is unusual, and Hahne has suggested 
κώλοις μετρίοις. If right, τριμέτροις must refer to the following three 
divisions, marking pauses (I. 15) in the examples given: κατέβην 
χθὲς | εἰς Πειραῖα | μετὰ Τ'λαύκωνος, and ἐκαθήμεθα μὲν | ἐπὶ τῶν θακῶν 


ἐν Λυκείῳ | οὗ οἱ ἀθλοθέται τὸν ἀγώνα διατιθέασιν. 
164 24 Sc. καὶ εἴ που (συγκρουστέον) βραχέα συγκρουστέον, κτλ. 


164 25 ‘Everything that is young is pretty’ will give some of 
the short syllables. 


NOTES 247 


164 28 The crasis κἀπὶ occurs on p. 94 |. 2 supra; and the use 
of ἐπὶ may be illustrated by ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ τέλος On p. 192 1. 8. 


166 8 The six lines /. xxi 257—262 are meant. 


166 23 The references made in this and the following sections 
to Ctesias point to a later date than that of Dem. Phal., in whose 
time he had hardly attained the position of a classic. Ctesias’ style 
is characterised in Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. το. Like Hippo- 
crates, he was a writer who had been comparatively little influenced 
by the rhetoric of the schools.—The word ἀδολεσχοτέρῳ also indicates 
a late date,—Plutarch, etc. 


166 28 Finckh (PAzlologus xv p. 154) pointed out that instead of 
Στρυάγλιος should be read Srpvayyaios, the reference being to the 
son-in-law of the Median king Astibaras. 


168 15 Some Greek passages bearing on the relation of history- 
writing to poetry are brought together in Norden’s Kumstprosa τ 
p- 92. With the wording of the present passage, cp. Dionys. Halic. 
Ep. ad Pomp. c. 3 (where the reference is to Herodotus and 
Thucydides) ἵνα δὲ συνελὼν εἴπω, καλαὶ μὲν at ποιήσεις ἀμφότεραι: οὐ 
γὰρ ἂν αἰσχυνθείην ποιήσεις αὐτὰς λέγων. 

168 16 καλοίη (without ἀν), cp. n. on p. 245 supra. 


168 23 παρὰ, in the sense ‘ because of,’ is rarely used of persons. 
But cp. Aristot. Rhef. 11 το, ὃ δῆλον yap ὅτι παρ᾽ αὐτοὺς od τυγχάνουσι 
τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, Isocr. 6, 52 παρὰ τοῦτον γενέσθαι τὴν σωτηρίαν, and 
Philodem. Voll. Μ᾿ οί. p. 297, 11 Sudh. συνορᾶν οὐ δύνανται, ποῖα παρ᾽ 
ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἁμαρτάνομεν καὶ ποίων διαπίπτομεν παρὰ τὸ τῶν πραγμάτων 
ἀνέφικτον. More commonly used of things, as παρ᾽ αὐτὰς τὰς λέξεις 
δ 145. Gregorius (Walz vil 2, p. 1180) transposes the clause and 
changes the preposition to πρός, thus getting the easy construction 
ἐλθὼν yap ὁ ἄγγελος πρὸς τὴν ἸΠαρύσατιν (Gregorius gives the more 
usual accent) οὐκ εὐθέως λέγει ὅτι ἀπέθανεν ὁ Κῦρος, κτλ. 

168 25 Cp. King David’s repeated inquiry “15 the young man 
Absalom safe?” in the Second Book of Samuel xviii 29, 32, when 
Ahimaaz and Cushi break the news of Absalom’s death. 

168 26 πέφευγε: cp. the similarly ambiguous use of ἀπολιπών pw 
ἀποίχεται in Aristoph. Ran. 83. 

168 30 μόλις here, but μόγις on p. 92]. 20: yet another instance 
of the love of variety seen throughout the treatise.—With τὸ δὴ 
λεγόμενον, cp. such passages as Lucian’s Θεσσαλίας pe ἐξέβαλεν ὅλης 


248 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Θετταλίαν ἀξιοῦν λέγειν, καὶ πᾶσαν ἀποκέκλεικέ μοι τὴν θάλασσαν οὐδὲ 
τῶν ἐν κήποις φεισάμενον σευτλίων, ὡς τὸ δὴ λεγόμενον μηδὲ πάσσαλόν 
μοι καταλιπεῖν (Ludic. Vocal., 9). 

168 30 ἀπέρρηξεν : cp. Appian de Bell. Civ. τι 81 ὁ δὲ ἸΤομπήιος 
μαθὼν ἐξ ἀλλοκότου σιωπῆς τοσοῦτον ἀπέρρηξεν and ΠΙ 13 ἀπερρήγνυ τε 
λήγων τοῦ λόγου ὅτι... 

168 31 αὐτό: the indefinite, but useful, ‘it.’ Gregorius (l.c.) 
rather spoils the phrase by making it too precise: καὶ οὕτω κατὰ 
μικρὸν προϊὼν μόλις ἀπέρρηξε τὸ ζητούμενον. 

170 1 ἀγγελοῦντα : Spengel suggests ἀγγελόντα (aor. ). 

170 4 ayporxos: a specifically Attic word. 


170 5 ἤκουστο: Cobet suggests yxovero.—We have a parallel 
instance of ἐνάργεια in Tennyson’s description of the meal taken by 
the lusty spearmen of the huge Earl Doorm: ‘And none spake 
word, but all sat down at once, | And ate with tumult in the naked 
hall, | Feeding like horses when you hear them feed” (Geraint and 
Lnid). 

170 9 Plat. Profag. 312 A καὶ ὃς εἶπεν ἐρυθριάσας ἤδη yap 
ὑπέφαινέ τι ἡμέρας, ὥστε καταφανῆ αὐτὸν γενέσθαι. The point of the 
praise is that two things are made clear in a single sentence: (1) he 
was blushing, (2) day was dawning. Cp. ‘And he turn’d, and I saw 
his eyes all wet, in the sweet moonshine” (Tennyson, Zhe Grand- 
mother). 

170 14 Elliptical: sub. ἐναργής ἐστι, ἐνάργειαν ποιεῖ, or the like. 

170 τό As in “ Proputty, proputty, proputty—canter an’ canter 
awady” (Tennyson), “The sound of many a heavily galloping hoof” 
(Tennyson), “I galloped, Dirck galloped, we galloped all three” 
(Browning). 

170 18 Such words as ‘whit’ in Tennyson’s “And whit, whit, 
whit in the bush beside me chirrupt the nightingale.” 

170 τὸ (. ὃ 94. 

170 23 The π. ἑρμ. is remarkable for the number and variety of 
its formulas of transition and conclusion. 

172 2 βεβαιοῦσαν : another example, apparently, of a transitive 
verb used intransitively (cp. παρέλκει on p. 98 1. 29 supra). βεβαίαν 
οὖσαν might perhaps be suggested as the true reading.—For per- 
suasiveness (which comes under the heading of the xap. ἰσχνός, in 
opposition to the xap. μεγαλοπρεπής) as avoiding elaborate language 


NOTES 249 


and formal rhythm, cp. Aristot. ἀεί. 11 2, 4 διὸ δεῖ λανθάνειν 
ποιοῦντας, Kal μὴ δοκεῖν λέγειν πεπλασμένως ἀλλὰ πεφυκότως: τοῦτο 
γὰρ πιθανόν, ἐκεῖνο δὲ τοὐναντίον. 

172 5 ἐπ᾽ ἀκριβείας : these adverbial expressions with ἐπί, though 
found in Demosthenes and Aristotle, are much more frequent in 
later Greek. Cp. Demosth. de Cor. ὃ 17 ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας οὐδεμιᾶς 
εἰρημένα, 1.6. ‘with no regard for truth’; and ἐπὶ τῆς ἀληθείας, ὃ 226 
214. 

172 13 The sections treating of the epistolary style are among 
the best in the treatise.—The remains of the Greek letter-writers are 
collected in Hercher’s Zpzstolographi Graeci, and reference made to 
“ Demetri Phalerei τύποι ἐπιστολικοὶ " On pp. I—6 (cp. Th. Zielinski 
in Philologus LX τ pp. 8, 9). In Latin antiquity and at the Revival 
of Learning Cicero and Erasmus are celebrated as the great letter- 
writers; in modern times there are many distinguished names in 
France and England, especially perhaps before the era of cheap and 
rapid communication. Much interesting matter will be found in the 
index volume of Tyrrell and Purser’s Correspondence of Cicero under 
the heading ‘ Epistolary style.’ From the modern standpoint, the 
art of letter-writing is sensibly treated in Verniolles’ Zrazté de 7 Art 
Epistolaire. Justus Lipsius, it may be added, drew on the π᾿ épp. in 
his Epzstolica Lnstitutio. 

172 14 Artemon: date uncertain, possibly as late as 130 B.C. or 
even later. It would seem, from this reference to him, that Artemon 
not only edited Aristotle’s Letters, but prefixed an introduction 
dealing with the general subject of letter-writing.—See Pauly-Wissowa 
II p. 1447. 

Whatever the precise date of Artemon may have been, the 
relation (here and elsewhere) of the 7. épu. to Aristotle suggests 
a follower far removed in time. 

172 15 avaypawas: ‘record,’ or ‘publish.’ Cp. π. vw. xiii 3, εἰ 
μὴ τὰ ἐπ’ εἴδους καὶ of περὶ ᾿Αμμώνιον ἐκλέξαντες ἀνέγραψαν, Dionys. 
Hal. de Thucyd. c. 5 οἱ μὲν τὰς Ἑλληνικὰς ἀναγράφοντες ἱστορίας. 

172 τό So Goethe (in Wahrheit und Dichtung) describes letters 
as “‘ideelle Dialoge.” 


172 30 Some such words as ai τοῦ διαλόγου may have been lost. 
1743 Plat. Huthyd. init. (271 A) Tis ἦν, ὦ Σώκρατες, ᾧ χθὲς ἐν 


> A ΄ “ 3 ΄ 
Λυκείῳ διελέγου ; ἦ πολὺς ὑμᾶς ὄχλος περιεστήκει, WoT ἔγωγε βουλόμενος 


250 DEMETRIOS ON STYLE 


3 , \ Or er > 5 > a ,ὕ ε ΄ ΄ 
ακουειν προσελθὼν οὐδὲν OLOS τ nV ακουσαι σαφές. ὑπερκύψας μεντοι 


κατεῖδον, καί μοι ἔδοξεν εἶναι ξένος τις, ᾧ διελέγου: τίς ἢν; 


174) πρέποι: for the optat. without av, cp. n. on p. 245 supra. 
But the regular av πρέποι is found on p. 206 1. 7. 


174 τὸ Cp. Buffon’s famous saying with regard to style in 
general, “Le style est VYhomme méme” (Descours de Réception a 
2 Académie, 1753), which has a still nearer Greek parallel in the 
words ἐπιεικῶς yap ἅπαντες νομίζουσιν εἰκόνας εἶναι τῆς ἑκάστου ψυχῆς 


τοὺς λόγους (Dionys. Halic. Ant. Rom. 1 1). 


174 τὸ Epicurus in his letter-writing seems to have avoided the 
faults here condemned: see Norden Aunstpyosa 1 pp. 123, 124. 


174 ΕΠ Cp. Abbott and Seeley, Azglish Lessons, p. 124 ἢ. 1: 
“‘ Burke’s ‘Reflections on the Revolution in France,’ though written in 
‘a letter intended to have been sent to a gentleman in Paris,’ have 
nothing but the ‘dear sir’ at the beginning in common with the style 
of a letter.”—It is to be noticed that, unlike the z. vy. and most of 
the critical essays of Dionysius, the 7. ἑρμ. is not couched in the 
epistolary form. 


174 τὸ C. F. Hermann suggested προγεγραμμένον in place of 
προσγεγραμμένον, which strictly refers to an addition rather than to a 
heading.—lf P’s ra Πλάτωνος πολλὰ be retained, we should compare 
p- 202 |. 26 Ξενοφώντος τὰ πολλά, though the words are there in the 
natural order. 


174 τὸ It is clear from p. 172 1. 15 that the author of the 7. ἑρμ. 
had access to collected editions of the letters of eminent writers. 
What the letter here attributed to Thucydides was we do not know: 
possibly that of Nicias in Thucyd. vir 11—15. 


174 24 Finckh would insert ἐν before ἐπιστολαῖς. But cp. p. 70 
1. 1 supra. The dative may be instrumental. 


174 27 Possibly τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἐπιστολικοῦ may mean ‘this same 
epistolary style. —Peripatetic admiration for Aristotle appears once 
more here. 


176 9 Ruhnken suggests the insertion of ἀπὸ before μηχανῆς : 
probably rightly, as διὰ μηχανῆς could hardly stand. Cp. Cobet 
(Mnemosyne N. S. X p. 42), ‘od bv ἐπιστολῆς ἔτι λαλοῦντι ἔοικεν 
ἄλλα μηχανῆς. Supplendum ἀλλ᾽ *ATIO μηχανῆς, noto et frequenti 


2) 


usu.” In the English Translation, ‘‘to be playing the ‘deus ex 


NOTES 251 


? 


machina’” might sound archaeological rather than literary; ‘to 
have mounted the pulpit’ is the general idea. 

176 τς There is an obvious play on the two senses, ‘ Graces’ 
and ‘favours.’ 

176 18 If the ai be retained, it will be best to punctuate after 
ἐπιστολαὶ and to translate: “let the letters be in keeping, viz. a 
little heightened.” Victorius reads τοι αὗται. 

176 22 The three extant letters purporting to be from Aristotle 
to Alexander are probably spurious ; they are found in Aul. Gell. xx 
5, Rhet. ad Alex. (init.), Valer. ΠΙ 79. 

176 28 παράκειται: cp. ὅδ᾽ 114, 186, 302, 304 for the same use 
of this verb. 

176 30 The examples in S$ 236—239 are clearly drawn from 
the age of decadence,—from the ‘ declamations’ of the later schools. 

178 4 P’s reading Tadypets has been variously emended into: 
(1) Γαδαρεύς, 1.6. Theodorus of Gadara, for whom see Introduction 
p- 54 and π. ὕψ. pp. 9, 242; (2) Tadepevs, or ‘man of Cadiz’: so 
Antimachus in his Latin version (1549 A.D.) gives Gadireus; 
(3) Φαληρεύς. By this last conjecture—that of Blass—is meant 
Demetrius of Phalerum.—The use of the form σμικρὸς shows the 
influence of Atticism. 


178 5 The ἐπὶ must apparently be repeated before τοῦ Φαλα- 
ριδος, unless there is a lacuna in the text. 


178 τό As this statement is not in accordance with historical 
fact (as established by Herodotus vir 79 and subsequent historians), 
it may be referred with some confidence to the rhetorical exercises of 
the later schools. 


178 17 The ὅτι in this line seems a superfluous repetition of 
that in 1. τό. 

178 24 Weil reads ἀηδίαν for ἀδειαν, here and in 1. 27: perhaps 
rightly. 

178 25 The reading of this passage in P is avrav. If τῇ 
ἀνθρώπῳ is the right reading, the corruption may have been due to: 
(1) the use of a compendium for ἀνθρώπῳ, as in ὃ 296 avot=avOpwror 
(so in S§ 79, 145, 157, 249, 260, in all of which cases a similar 
abbreviation is used) ; (2) the comparative rarity of the feminine 7 
ἄνθρωπος. Perhaps we should read καθάπερ ὁ τῆς ἀνθρώπου Τιμάνδρας 
on p. 206]. 12 infra, where P’s reading is καθάπερ 6 αὐττημανδρας. 


252 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


The conceit here lies in the substitution of 7 ἄνθρωπος (homo, 
mortal creature) for γυνή. There is an admixture of cynicism, too ; 
the thought being as far as possible removed from the ‘pure 
womanly” of Hood’s Bridge of Sighs. 

180 2 λοιπὸν, ‘next’ or ‘now’: cp. p. 86 1. 23 supra. Frequent 
in later Greek. See Rutherford, Scholia Aristophanica, τι p. 574. 

180 5 Cp.§ 75 supra. Again the writer’s standpoint is empha- 
sized,—that it is best to appraise λέξις as λέξις, and not to give to it 
any credit which rightly belongs to the subject-matter. 

180 6 αὐλητρία: late,—Diog. Laert., etc. The classical form is 
αὐλητρίς. : 

180 τό For this and the following sections, cp. Gregor. Cor. in 
Walz, Phett. Gr. vil 2 pp. 1179 ff. 

1825 It is difficult to infer the date of the treatise from the 
words τὴν viv κατέχουσαν here and ot νῦν ῥήτορες in ὃ 287, except that 
the general standpoint seems post-classical. 

182 7 Cp. Hermog. de 74. 1 p. 342 (Sp.) τοιοῦτον ἐστι καὶ τὸ 
“ὡμόλογησα τούτοις, ws ἂν οἷός τε ὦ, συνερεῖν. ἢ μὲν γὰρ ἔννοια 
βέβηκεν, ὃ ῥυθμὸς δὲ οὐ: οὐδὲ γὰρ τοῦτο ὃ ῥήτωρ ἐβούλετο, ἐπεὶ τοῦ 
χάριν οὐκ εἶπεν “ ὡμολόγησα τούτοις, ὡς ἂν οἷός τε ὦ, συνειπεῖν ;᾿ ἐγὼ 
μὲν γὰρ ἡγοῦμαι, διὰ τὸ μὴ ὅμοιον ἂν γενέσθαι τὸν ἦχον, εἰς μακρὰς 
πάσας εἰ κατέληγεν, ὅ ἐστι τοῦ βεβηκότος ῥυθμοῦ. οὐ μὴν ἀλλ᾽ εἴτε 
βεβηκὼς εἴτε μὴ ὃ τοιοῦτος εἴη ῥυθμός, ἵνα μὴ πάντη τῷ Διονυσίῳ, ὃς 
δοκεῖ περὶ λέξεως τι πεπραγματεῦσθαι, ἀντιλέγωμεν, δῆλον ὡς τοῦ κάλλους 
ἐστὶν ἴδιος. : 

182 12 Demosth. Left. ὃ 2 ἐν μὲν yap τῷ γράψαι “ μηδέν᾽ εἶναι 
ἀτελῆ, τοὺς ἔχοντας ἀφείλετο τὴν ἀτέλειαν, ἐν δὲ τῷ προσγραψαι “ μηδὲ 
τὸ λοιπὸν ἐξεῖναι δοῦναι, ὑμᾶς τὸ δοῦναι ὑμῖν ἐξεῖναι. 

For a troubled movement of words used with effect, cp. Heine’s 
“Betend dass Gott dich erhalte” (in ‘ Du bist wie eine Blume’), and 
Stephen Phillips’ “Thou last sea of the navigator, last | Plunge of 
the diver, and last hunter’s leap” (in Udysses). 

182 13 Though the plural verb with neuter plural nominative is 
frequent in later Greek and even in Aristotle, yet (as there is no 
other certain instance in the 7. €pu.) it may be better here to supply 
at τοιαῦται περίοδοι, rather than τὰ ἀντίθετα καὶ παρόμοια, as the 
subject to ποιοῦσιν. 


182 14 οἷον ws: a pleonasm of the same kind as ‘like as’ in 
English. 


NOTES 253 


182 27 τὰς καταβάσεις : perhaps the meaning is ‘a flight of steps,’ 
cp. καταβάσιον in Roman and Byzantine Greek. 


182 30 Cp. the force gained, in Pope’s Zfistle to Dr Arbuthnot, 
by reserving till the end of a long passage the name of χα ζέσις : 
“Who but must laugh, if such a man there be? | Who would not 
weep, if Atticus were he?” 


184 2 The fragment of Antisthenes (the Cynic) will also be 
found in A. W. Winckelmann’s Axftisthents Fragmenta pp. 52, 53. 
The floruit of Antisthenes, of Aeschines ($$ 205, 291, 297), and of 
Aristippus (ὃ 296) may be given as 400—365 B.C. 

184 - φρυγάνων : the meaning is obscure, some hunted human 
victim being possibly referred to. 


184 3, 5 Either ὀδυνήσειεν... ὀδυνήσειεν, or ὀδυνήσει... ὀδυνήσει, 
seems necessary, aS any variation here obscures the point. 


184 7 We might have expected § 250 to follow immediately on 
§ 247. The treatise contains many afterthoughts, and many addi- 
tions, whether due to the original author or to some later hand. The 
reference in ἐπὶ τοῦ Θεοπόμπου is to δὴ 27, 247. 

184 8 Milton seems to have this passage of the π. ἕρμ. in view 
in his Apology for Smectymnuus, when he writes: ‘‘ There, while they 
acted and overacted, among other young scholars, I was a spectator ; 
they thought themselves gallant men, and I thought them fools; 
they made sport, and I laughed; they mispronounced, and I mis- 
liked; and to make up the atticism, they were out, and I hissed.” 
For Muilton’s knowledge of this treatise, see note on ‘ Milton and 
Demetrius de Elocutione’ in Classical Review XV pp. 453, 454. 

184 16 and 18 The idiomatic use of καὶ τοῦτο, and of λέγω δέ, is 
to be noted as specially Attic. 


184 22 For aposiopesis, see also § 103 supra.—This passage is 
paraphrased by Greg. Cor. (Walz, Ret. Gr. vil 2, 1170). 


184 26 For Burke’s view of the relation between obscurity and 
sublimity, see π. vy. p. 32. 


186 2 Has the writer the digamma in mind when he calls 
attention to the fact that the reconstructed line will still ‘scan’? If 
so, his date must be late. 


186 6 A corrupt, and possibly interpolated, section.—The word 
προσστοχασόμεθα (so Goeller for προστοχασόμεθα) is found only here, 
and its construction with an accusative is remarkable. 


254 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


186 13. As Goeller points out, these words read like a prose 
paraphrase (possibly by the author himself) of //zad 1 11, 22. 


186 20 These later sections contain much disputable matter. 
Here, for instance, the statement made with regard to the yap. 
γλαφυρὸς and the xap. δεινὸς hardly tallies with $§ 36, 37. 

186 21 As in Pope’s lines, ‘‘ Where London’s column, pointing 
at the skies, | Like a tall bully, lifts the head, and lies” (Zfiséle to 
Lord Bathurst). 

186 23 Elliptical: τοιοῦτος, or the like, should be supplied ; cp. 
§ 170. 

186 24 This line of Crates (for whom see p. 240 supra) is a 
parody of that of Homer quoted in § 113: cp. Corpusculum Poesis 
Lipicae Graecae Ludibundae vol. 11 (ed. C. Wachsmuth) p. 196. 

186 29 ὑποδάκνω : late,—Appian, de Bell. Civ. 1 tot. 

1884 Gregorius Cor. (Walz vi 2, p. 1181) has ἔφη (θάρσει, 
ἔφη, ὦ μειράκιον, οὐκ εἰμὶ ταύτῃ ὅμοιος), and editors have usually 
inserted εἶπεν between παιδίον and οὐκ. But it seems better to regard 
this as one of those ellipses of which the author is so fond. 
Gregorius deals too freely with the text to have much weight in 
critical questions. 

188 28 Plat. Menex. 246 D ὦ παῖδες, ὅτι μέν ἐστε πατέρων ἀγαθῶν, 
αὐτὸ μηνύει τὸ νῦν παρόν: ἡμῖν δ᾽ ἐξὸν ζῆν μὴ καλῶς, καλῶς αἱρούμεθα 
μᾶλλον τελευτᾶν, πρὶν ὑμᾶς τε καὶ τοὺς ἔπειτ᾽ εἰς ὀνείδη καταστῆσαι, καὶ 
πρὶν τοὺς ἡμετέρους πατέρας καὶ πᾶν τὸ πρόσθεν γένος αἰσχῦναι, κτλ. 

190 τό Spengel suggests διὰ τὸ τὴν ἀπόληξιν τοῦ “καλεῖς᾽ λέγεσθαι 
πολλάκις. 

190 19 These words may suggest as a possible reading on p. 160 
1. 3 πολλὴν ἀπάθειαν ἅμα τοῖς συνδέσμοις ἐμβαλεῖς (instead of συνεμ- 
βαλεῖς as there suggested). 

190 21 P has épyar’, which may stand either for ἐργάτην or 
ἐργάτιν : cp. p. 156 1]. 22, 7 AcE --τὴν λέξιν. Here épyatw (‘the 
handmaid of,’ ‘ancillary to’) seems clearly nght. 

190 22 Demosth. de Falsa Legat. 442 καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀγορᾶς πορεύεται 
θοἰμάτιον καθεὶς ἀχρι τῶν σφυρῶν, ἴσα βαίνων ΠΠυθοκλεῖ, τὰς γνάθους 
φυσῶν, κτλ. 

190 23 For εἰ with the subjunctive, cp. ὃ 76 supra. Schneider, 
συναφθείη. 


NOTES 255 


190 27 Quoted as an example of κλῖμαξ, or gradatio, by Quin- 
tilian (1X 3, 54) in the Latin form, ‘‘Non enim dixi quidem sed non 
scripsi, nec scripsi quidem sed non obii legationem, nec obii quidem 
sed non persuasi Thebanis.” Aquila Romanus (Halm fez. Lat. 
Min. p. 34) remarks “‘Haec autem animadvertis, quanto elatius dicta 
sint, quam si simpliciter enunciasset: ‘Et dixi haec, et scripsi, et in 
legationem profectus sum, et persuasi Thebanis’.” The structure 
of the passage is carefully explained in Goodwin’s edition of the de 


Corona p. 130. Cp. Glossary s.v. κλῖμαξ. 


192 4 Cp. Aristot. Ae. 11 12, 2.—With the text as it stands, 
τὸ διαλελυμένον seems to be in the accusative case. A better sense 
would be obtained by placing μάλιστα τὸ διαλελυμένον before ὑπόκρι- 
σιν, 1.e. ‘the figures of speech, and especially asyndeton (cp. ὃ 301), 
help the speaker,’ etc. 


19212 The rhythm of this sentence of Demosthenes is discussed 
in 7. vy. Cc. xxxIx 4. Cp. Goodwin, of. εἴΖ., p. 134 (where read ἔτι 


προσπίπτει for ἔτι σημαίνει). 
192 15 ἄπειρος here may be a gloss on ἀπρονοήτως. 


192 20 Cp. Courthope Zife im Poetry: Law in Taste p. 21: 
“The question, for example, as to the right of coining new words or 
reviving disused words in poetry was (sc. at the time when the 
Quarterly reviewed Keats’ Endymion) as old as Horace ; it had been 
debated in Italy by Castiglione in his Cowrtzer ; it had been raised in 
France by the Pleiad, and afterwards discussed by almost every 
French critic; it was familiar in England since the publication of 
Lyly’s Euphues. The ruling on the point is given with admirable 
clearness in Horace’s Ars Poetica; ‘Multa renascentur quae iam 
cecidere, cadentque | Quae nunc sunt in honore vocabula, si volet 
usus, | Quem penes arbitrium est et ius et norma loquendi.’ Usus ; 
usage; the genius of the language; there was the law. The sole 
question was whether Keats had violated the law, and if so, with 
what amount of justification.” 


192 21 i.e. ‘harlot’ and ‘madman.’ 

192 27 διέφαγεν, if retained, will have much the same meaning 
as ἐτρύπησεν. 

194 5 σφετεριζόμενος : the English verb spheterize is used, play- 
fully no doubt, in a letter of Sir William Jones (S. Parr’s Works, 
ed. 1828, 1 109), “Remember to reserve for me a copy of your 


256 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


book. I am resolved to spheterize some passages of it.” (The 
reference is given, after Dr J. A. H. Murray, in Goodwin’s edition of 
the de Corona, p. 53.) 

194 21 μετέχοι without ay: cp. n. on p. 245 supra. 

194 23 See C. .} A. 1 328, IV pp. 12, 63 (for golden Victories 
mentioned as Acropolis treasures in 435 B.c. and other years) ; 
Bulletin de Corresp. Hell. xu 283 ff. (for a discussion of their 
meaning and a description of their melting down). Schol. ad 
Aristoph. Ran. 720 τῷ προτέρῳ ἔτει ἐπὶ ᾿Αντιγένους “EAXaviKos φησι 
χρυσοῦν νόμισμα κοπῆναι καὶ Φιλόχορος ὁμοίως τὸ ἐκ τῶν χρυσῶν 
Νικῶν. Quintil. 1x 2, 92 “‘confinia sunt his celebrata apud Graecos 
schemata, per quae res asperas mollius significant. nam Themis- 
tocles suasisse existimatur Atheniensibus, ut urbem apud deos 
deponerent, quia durum erat dicere, ut ve/inguerent. Et, qui Victorias 
aureas in usum belli conflari volebat, ita declinavit, vctorits utendum 
esse.” Quintilian and the Auctor de Elocutione may have drawn 
from some common source. 

196 1 As Sandys (Orator of Cicero p. 101) points out, the author 
is apparently referring to a collection of some of Demades’ striking 
sayings, though there are divergences of ascription (cp. n. on I. 14 
infra). Sandys’ note ad /oc. may be consulted ; he is careful to quote 
Cicero’s words (Gru. 36) “ cuius nulla extant scripta.” 


196 6 ‘The natural sense is ‘the whole world would have smelt 
of (reeked with) the corpse’: cp. Theocr. vil 143 πάντ᾽. ὦσδεν θέρεος 
μάλα πίονος, ὦσδε δ᾽ ὀπώρας. The interpretation given in 1. 7, how- 
ever, points to another and a late date. The chapter, as a whole, 
which deals with the χαρακτὴρ δεινὸς may be regarded as the least 
satisfactory in the 7. épp. 

196 14 Some of the examples quoted may be simply ‘Dema- 
dean,’ and not actually by Demades himself. Cp. 7. vw. xv 10 os 
vy Δία καὶ ὁ Ὑπερίδης κατηγορούμενος, ἐπειδὴ τοὺς δούλους μετὰ τὴν 
ἧτταν ἐλευθέρους ἐψηφίσατο, “τοῦτο τὸ ψήφισμα, εἶπεν, “οὐχ ὁ ῥήτωρ 
ἔγραψεν ἀλλ᾽ ἡ ἐν Χαιρωνείᾳ μάχη : cp. Plut. Moral. 849 a. 

196 18 The style meant is of the same order as that of William 
Cobbett, parodied in Rejected Addresses: “I will endeavour to 
explain this to you: England is a large earthenware pipkin. John 
Bull is the beef thrown into it. ‘Taxes are the hot water he boils in. 
Rotten boroughs are the fuel that blazes under this same pipkin. 
Parliament is the ladle that stirs the hodge-podge.” 


NOTES 257 


196 21 Sauppe’s ἐπὶ τοῦ for ἐπεὶ gives an easier construction for 
the infinitive.—zricavy is ‘ barley-water,’ or ‘gruel,’ as prescribed by 
the doctors: for example, Hippocrates’ treatise περὶ διαίτης ὀξέων 
(‘concerning diet in acute diseases’) also goes by the name περὶ 
πτισάνης (‘concerning gruel’).—It is not easy to suppose that 
Demetrius Phalereus, his contemporary, would thus have played the 
scholiast to Demades.—xpeavoyia is a somewhat late word. But it 
seems to have been used by Theopompus, and κρεανόμος and 
κρεανομεῖν Occur in writers of the classical period. 


198 7 It is doubtful whether διαλύσαντας (the original reading 
of P) can mean ‘having made no attempt to free.’ 


198 20 ἢ ἄλλως βίαιόν twa: these words would probably cover 
the ‘civium ardor prava iubentium,’ as seen at Athens in the case of 
Socrates: cp. p. 202 l. 6. 


198 21 ὁρμῶντες = ὁρμώμενοι, which Greg. Cor. gives (Walz vit 
2, p. 1180). Cp. π. ὕψ. xxl 4 τὸν νοῦν, ὃν ὥρμησεν εἰπεῖν. 


198 22 Finckh refers to §§ 287 and 290 in support of his 
reading (here adopted) σχήματος λόγου. But Gregor. Cor. (Walz νι 
2, p. 1180) has χρήζομεν ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἐπικρύψεως σχήματος odov. A 
‘complete’ figure may be so by way of contrast with ἐπαμφοτερίζουσιν 
on p. 200 |. 6. 


198 26 ὀνειδιστικῶς : the adverb and the adjective are late,— 
Lucian, Marcus Aurelius, Hermogenes, Chrysostom, ete. 


198 27 The fragments of Demetrius Phalereus are collected in 
C. Miller’s Oratores Attici 1 pp. 475—477 and Fragm. Hist. Graec. 
II pp. 362—360. 

2006 After ἐπαμῴοτερίζουσιν Weil would write: ὥστε ἐπαίνοις 
ἐοικέναι, εἴ τις ἐθέλοι, καὶ ψόγοις, εἰ καὶ ψόγους εἶναι θέλοι τις. Cobet 
(Collectanea Critica p. 237) suggests: εἰ καὶ παραψόγους εἶναι θέλοι τις. 
—The word εἰκαιόψογος (Victorius’ suggestion) is not found else- 
where. 


200 9 The Zée/auges was one of the seven dialogues of Aeschines 
Socraticus which were admitted in antiquity to be genuine, viz. 
Μιλτιάδης, Καλλίας, “Agtoxos, ᾿Ασπασία, ᾿Αλκιβιάδης, Τηλαυγής, Ῥίνων 
(Pauly-Wissowa I 1049). Aeschines is mentioned also in §§ 205, 
Be | and possibly in ὃ 170. See Norden Kwumstprosa 1 p. 103. 
(Aeschines the orator is mentioned in §§ 267, 268.) 


R. 17 


258 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


200 14 These references to potentates suggest not only the 
scholastic point of view, but also something of the κόλαξ μεγαλοφυής, 
—of τὸ ἀπαρρησίαστον καὶ οἷον ἔμφρουρον ὑπὸ συνηθείας ἀεὶ κεκονδυλι- 
σμένον (π. ὕψ., Cc. xliv). 

200 τς δυνάστις : found only here, cp. βασιλώ. 

200 τὸ ἀποτομία: late,—Diodorus, Philo, New ‘Testament, 
Plutarch, ete. 

200 22 ὥζηλοτυπεῖν, rare with the dative; perhaps on the analogy 
of the Latin aemz/ard (though ‘aemulari,’ when used in a good sense 
as ζηλοτυπεῖν apparently is here, more usually has the accusative). 

200 26 ἑτερόφθαλμος : specifically Attic word, found in Aristot. 
Rhet. Wt το, 7 εἰς. 

202 4 δυναστευτικόν : references of this kind might well apply to 
the Roman empire. Cp. §§ 234, 289, 294. It has, however, been 
suggested that § 294 would also accord with the chequered career of 
Demetrius Phalereus. For the point of view, contrast 7. ὕψ. xvil 1 
ἀγανακτεῖ yap εὐθύς, κτλ. τ 

202 12 Spengel suggests ἐπαινεσόμεθα, in order to bring the 
form into harmony with p. 200 1]. 19 and with regular usage.—This 
section is a good illustration of the Baconian ‘ laudando praecipere.’ 

202 24 The words quoted may be by Aristippus of Cyrene him- 
self, as Natorp points out in Pauly-Wissowa 11 p. 905. 

204 6 λεληθότως is a late word, occurring in Cic. (Leéders), 
Dionys. Halic., etc. λανθανόντως (ὃ 181) is later still (Dio Cassius, 
Pollux, etc.) and should be noted as an index of date.—For the form 
ἠνέμνησεν, 586 p. 210 supra. 

204 8 For οὐχὶ here, cp. ὃ 256 παρεγένετο οὐχί. The occurrences 
of οὐχὶ in Demosthenes are noted in Preuss’ /udex Demosthenicus. 

204 12 Weil suggests μετὰ φιλοφροσύνης, in place of pera 
μεγαλοφροσύνης. 

206 2 προλέλεκται is late: so also τουτέστι, |. 5. 

206 59 Hipponax: see ὃ 132 supra, and W. Christ Grech. Litt. 
Ρ. 137: 

206 το The coarse, as the counterpart of the forcible, style is 
abundantly exemplified in Pope’s writings; especially, perhaps, in 
the Dunciad Book I. 

206 τι dvopyros: hardly found elsewhere in the sense of 
appytos, δύσφημος. 


NOTES 259 


206 12 For the reading, see n. on p. 178 1. 25. 


206 13 Aexavis: late,—Plutarch, etc. If the word was actually 
employed by the accuser of Timandra and the accuser was Hyperides, 
it must of course have been in use at an earlier date. But the identifi- 
cation of the two (though it has the support of Suidas) is question- 
able: cp. Blass Av. Bereds. 1 2, 29.—Wilamowitz-Moellendorff 
would read ὀλίσβους instead of ὀβολούς. 


206 14 wWiaGos: specifically Attic word. 


206 14 κατερᾶν: late,—Strabo, Plutarch, etc. The reference 
in Liddell and Scott 5.ν. is to the present passage (“cited from Dem. 
Phal.”). 

206 15 Blass (lc.) reports the reading here as πολλήν τινα 
τοιαύτην δυσφημίαν ἑταιρῶν κατήρασε τοῦ δικαστηρίου : cp. Facsimile. 


206 19 διερρηγμένοις : one of the many cases in which an Ionic 
form (familiar through Homer and Herodotus) reappears in later 
Greek. The perf. pass. ἔρρηγμαι is used (e.g.) by Arran among 
later writers. 

206 21 ‘The predicate in the neuter is found frequently in the 
π. ἕρμ. (e.g. p. 184 1. 1, p. 158 1. 25); here we have a rare example 
of the same construction with a plural subject. 


206 25 Cleitarchus: see π᾿ ὕψ. p. 223. The same passage of 
Cleitarchus, quoted at greater length, appears in Diodor. Sic. 
XVII 75. 


DD) Eh tONATE NOR 


PROVERBS IN THE DE ELOCUTIONE. 


An interesting feature of the treatise On Style is the due appre- 
ciation it shows of a proverb when used in season. The author is 
clearly alive to the risk which book-writing runs of parting company 
with the liveliness and raciness of the vernacular. He sees how 
important it is to keep in touch with the familiar thought and 
language of the people,—with the vulgar tongue. 

It is the Lord Chesterfields of literature and life who condemn, 
on the score of vulgarity, the use of proverbial expressions. The 
manlier natures have always used them boldly. In the π᾿ ἕρμ. are 

17—2 


260 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


found two threats, ‘Dionysius (is) at Corinth” (§§ 8, 9, 102, 241) 
and ‘You shall hear your cicalas chirping on the ground” (§§ 99, 
100, 243), attributed respectively to the Lacedaemonians and to the 
tyrant Dionysius’. The true analogues of these threatening messages 
are such verses in the Old Testament as “ And as Jehu entered in at 
the gate, she said, Had Zimri peace, who slew his master?” (2 Kings, 
ix. 31) and “1 also have given you cleanness of teeth in all your 
cities” (Amos iv. 6); or the reply (including some words from the 
Old Testament) said to have been given by Richard Coeur de Lion 
to the Pope’s demand for the release of ‘‘My son, the Bishop.” 
Richard sent the Pope the coat-ofmail worn by the bishop in the 
battle, with the message, ‘‘ This have we found: know now whether 
it be thy son’s coat or no” (Genesis xxxvil. 32). Homelier examples 
of proverbs used or made (it is often difficult to say which) are 
President Lincoln’s advice “not to swop horses while crossing the 
stream,” Prince Bismarck’s references to “ bleeding like veal,” or (to 
be more modern still) the statement of the President of the South 
African Republic that he was ‘“‘ waiting for the tortoise to put out its 
head ” (i.e. for the opportunity of striking which the Jameson Raid 
would give him), or the same President’s remark that Mr Rhodes 
“‘made one hand wash the other” (1.6. made each one of his schemes 
subserve the other). In antiquity it is to be noticed that Julius 
Caesar casts his precept in a proverbial form, when counselling the 
use of the current language of his time: ‘Vive ergo moribus 
praeteritis, loquere verbis praesentibus atque id, quod a C. Caesare, 
excellentis ingenii ac prudentiae viro, in primo de analogia libro 
scriptum est, habe semper in memoria atque in pectore, ut /amguam 
scopulum, sic fugias inauditum atque insolens verbum” (Favorinus 
philosophus ap. Aul. Gell. 1. x.). 

Aristotle is said to have defined, or described, proverbs as the 
scattered remains of primitive philosophy, preserved thanks to their 
pithy form amid the wrecks of the ages’; and his extant writings 


1 The former threat is supposed to have been addressed by the Lacedae- 
monians to Philip, the latter by Dionysius to the Locrians (though, according to 
Aristot. “het. ii. 21, 8 and iii. 11, 6, the original author was Stesichorus). In 
English, the expression ‘making the squirrels walk’ is used of a great fall of 
wood.—Acoviicios ἐν Κορίνθῳ occurs in Cic. Ef. ad Att. ix. g, where see Tyrrell 
and Purser’s note. 

2 Synesius calvit. encom. c. 22 p. 234 Krab. (1850): εἰ δὲ καὶ ἡ παροιμία σοφόν" 
πῶς δ᾽ οὐχὶ σοφὸν περὶ wy ᾿Αριστοτέλης φησὶν ὅτι παλαιᾶς εἰσὶ φιλοσοφίας ἐν ταῖς 


NOTES 261 


show how often, and with what effect, he drew upon the stores of 
Greek proverbial wisdom. Plato had previously displayed the same 
width of view, as his dialogues bear witness’. Sophron may have 
influenced Plato in this respect, since “almost all the proverbs in 
existence might be collected out of Sophron’s plays” (7. ἑρμ. ὃ 156): 
a statement which receives some confirmation from his fragments 
and from the Adoniazusae of Theocritus, and might also be abundantly 
illustrated by the practice of Shakespeare or Cervantes’. 

Examples of the proverbs used by Sophron are given in the same 
section of the De £locutione*. ‘There is ancient authority for sup- 
posing that the well-known proverb ἀρχὴ ἥμισυ παντὸς (§ 122: ‘well- 
begun half-done’) is formed on the model of Hesiod’s πλέον ἥμισυ 
παντός, but the truth rather seems to be that Hesiod is improving 
upon, and giving a different application to, a proverb already in 
existence’. Curiously enough, too, the highly artificial line attributed 
to Sophocles, ἀπυνδάκωτος ov τραπεζοῦται κύλιξ (ὃ 114), was by some 


μεγίσταις ἀνθρώπων φθοραῖς ἀπολομένης ἐγκαταλείμματα περισωθέντα διὰ συντομίαν 
καὶ δεξιότητα ; (Berlin Aristotle v. 1474). 

1 See the copious list in Bonitz’ Zdex Aristotelicus pp. 569, 570; and for the 
Rhetoric in particular, Sandys’ Index to Cope’s edition, iii. pp. 268, 269. 

2 See the Index to Jowett’s Dialogues of Plato, s.v. Proverbs; and also 
Griinwald’s Sprichworter und sprichwortliche Redensarten bei Plato. 

Among later writers Polybius makes much use of proverbs (cp. the recent 
‘ Polybius-Forschungen’ of Carl Wunderer, who thinks that he drew on Chry- 
sippus’ collection of proverbs), while Byzantine appreciation (running to excess) 
is reflected in the marginal references to “Παροιμία᾽ in P 1741. Some of the 
later rhetoricians assigned proverbs a place among the ‘ figures.’ 

3 It is to be noted that the 7. épu. stands apart from other works of its class in 
its references to Sophron, who is not named by any of the Greek rhetoricians 
(including Dionys. Halic.), nor in the Rhetoric of Aristotle, who however men- 
tions him near the beginning of the Poetics and ἐν τῷ περὶ ποιητῶν (Athen. xi. 
505 C). ; 

4 E.g. ἐκ Tod ὄνυχος τὸν λέοντα ἔγραψεν and τορύναν ἔξεσεν : sentiments which, 
as Mr Way points out, have usually a jingling sound in English,—‘from seeing 
but a claw | The lion would he draw,’ ‘he had such an artistic soul | That he 
polished the scullery-bowl.’ In the same section κύμινον érpice is said to have 
the following French parallels: tondre sur un wuf, gréler sur le persil, couper un 
cheveu en quatre. Greek κυμινοπρίστης ΞΕ Latin cumini sector. 

> ἀρχὴ ἥμισυ παντὸς occurs in Plat. Legg. vi. 753 E (ἀρχὴ yap λέγεται μὲν ἥμισυ 
παντὸς ἐν ταῖς παροιμίαις ἔργου), Polyb. v. 32, 1 (θαρρῶν yap ἄν τις εἴποι, οὐχ ἥμισυ 
τὴν ἀρχὴν εἶναι τοῦ παντός, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς τὸ τέλος διατείνειν) and elsewhere. 
Pythagoras was sometimes supposed to be its author. Cp. Leutsch and Schneide- 
win, Paroem. Gr. i. p. 213, li. pp. 13, 14. 


262 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


writers ranked as a proverb’. Whether it ever really became such, we 
may take leave to doubt, remembering that (as the late Archbishop 
Trench has pointed out in his book on Pvoverbs) an aphorism, 
however true or striking it may be, cannot be classed as a proverb 
unless it be shown to have vogue’. 

The part which the proverb plays as popular philosophy is well 
indicated in § 232: ‘‘it is the wisdom of a people, it is the wisdom 
of the world.” Its frequent use in letters is there recommended: a 
precept endorsed, as we know, by the practice of Cicero®. The 
Stoics (notably Chrysippus, as mentioned in the note on § 172) 
studied proverbs, but hardly for the purpose of letter-writing. Their 
object was to discover, by means of proverbs and ancient poetry, the 
primitive meaning, and so the etymology, of words. ‘The particular 
phrases quoted in ὃ 172 (Αἰγυπτία κληματὶς and θαλάσσιον πρόβατον) 
may fairly be regarded as proverbial’. 

Among the remaining proverbial or quasi-proverbial expressions 
in the z. Epp. may be mentioned: τὸ ev τῇ παροιμίᾳ κοσμούμενον 
umepov® (δ 119), τὰ σῦκα σῦκα" (§ 229); ἡ λεγομένη ἀπὸ Σκυθῶν ῥῆσις 
and τὸ λεγόμενον τοῦτο ἀπὸ Σκυθῶν (δὴ 216, 297: the brutal side of 
τὰ σῦκα σῦκα: σκυθίζειν in ὃ 96 simply referring to the use of jargon) ; 
«θεὸς ἀπὸ: μηχανῆς (§ 232: ‘deus ex machina’); τὸ δὴ λεγόμενον, 
ἀπέρρηξεν αὐτὸ (ὃ 216: ‘broke the news’); τὸ ἐν πενθοῦσι παίζειν 
(8. 28: ‘gaiety at a funeral’); τυφλῷ δῆλον (SS 112, 239: ‘as plain as 
a pikestaff’). 


1 Leutsch-Schneid. of. cét. ii. p. 747. 

2 Thus γνῶθι σεαυτὸν and ἕπου θεῴ (§ g) are ἀποφθέγματα rather than 
παροιμίαι. 

3 See Tyrrell and Purser’s Zudex to the Correspondence of Cicero, pp. 86, 97. 

4 Cp. Leutsch-Schneid. of. cét., Praef., p. v- 

5 ὕπερον κοσμεῖς : ὅμοιον τῷ, Χύτραν ποικίλλεις (Leutsch-Schneid. of. cit. i. 459); 
Αἰθιόπα σμήχεις : δῆλον τὸ τοιοῦτον : ὁμοῖα, χύτραν ποικίλλεις, Gov τίλλεις (2d2d. i. 
187). This proverb is, in fact, of the same class as καλλωπίζειν πίθηκον (π. ἑρμ. 
§ 165), and as Plutarch’s selection of proverbs περὶ τῶν ἀδυνάτων given in Leutsch- 
Schneid. i. pp. 343 ff. 

6 Cp. Luc. de hist. conscrib. c. 41 τοιοῦτος οὖν μοι 6 συγγραφεὺς ἔστω, ἄφοβος, 
ἀδέκαστος, ἐλεύθερος, παρρησίας καὶ ἀληθείας φίλος, ws ὁ κωμικός φησι, τὰ σῦκα σῦκα, 
τὴν σκάφην δὲ σκάφην ὀνομάζων, κτλ. ; Plut. Moral. p. 178 B (Philippi Apophtheg- 
mata) τῶν δὲ περὶ Λασθένην τὸν ᾿Ολύνθιον ἐγκαλούντων καὶ ἀγανακτούντων, ὅτι 
προδότας αὐτοὺς ἔνιοι τῶν περὶ τὸν Φίλιππον ἀποκαλοῦσι, σκαιοὺς ἔφη φύσει καὶ 
ἀγροίκους εἶναι Μακεδόνας, καὶ τὴν σκάφην σκάφην λέγοντας. 


CEOSS ee Vis Oa NEE ORTE 
GRAMMAR, METRE, AND 
ΠΙΤΕΚΑΚΥ ΟΚΙΤΙΟΙ5Μ. 


The references in the Glossary are made to the sec¢zons of the περὶ ‘Epunvetas. 


ἀγών. 226, 271. Contest, debate. Lat. certamen, contentio. The 
word is more fully treated in 7. vy. p. 194 and D. H. p. 184. In 
ὃ 187 the verb ἀγωνίζεσθαι is used in its ordinary sense of ‘contending 
for a prize.’ 


ἀδόλεσχος. 212. Garrulous. Lat. loguax. The comparative 
ἀδολεσχότερος presupposes not the classical ἀδολέσχης but the hellen- 
istic ἀδόλεσχος (as in Cic. ad 4177. xvi. 11, 2, Plut. de Garrul. c. 13, 
p- 509 B), and is, therefore, an indication of late date. 


ἀθροίζειν. 9, 268, 283. Zo muster, to compress. Lat. colligere, 
coacervare. Cp. ἀθροισμός, 7. ὕψ. p. 194. 

αἴνιγμα. 102. Riddle. Lat. aenigma 5. allegoria obscurior (Quintil. 
Vill. 6, 52). Aristot. Poet. xxil. 2 αἰνίγματός τε yap ἰδέα αὕτη ἐστί, τὸ 
λέγοντα ὑπάρχοντα ἀδύνατα συνάψαι. Trypho (Sp. RA. Gr. i. p. 193) 
αἴνιγμά ἐστι φράσις ἐπιτετηδευμένη κακοσχόλως εἰς ἀσάφειαν ἀποκρύπ- 
τουσα τὸ νοούμενον, ἢ ἀδύνατόν τι καὶ ἀμήχανον παριστάνουσα. 

αἰτιατικός. 201. Accusative. πτῶσις αἰτιατικὴ = Lat. casus accu- 
Sativus. 

ἄκαιρος. 118, 238. Snopportune. Lat. intempestivus. The word 
can be used of Zersons no less than of things, as by Dionysius when 
describing the brevity of Lysias: καὶ οὐκ ἐπὶ μὲν τῆς ἑρμηνείας τοιοῦτός 
ἐστιν, ἐν δὲ τοῖς πράγμασιν ἀκαιρός τις καὶ μακρός, συνέστραπται δὲ εἴ τις 
καὶ ἄλλος καὶ πεπύκνωται τοῖς νοήμασι, κτλ. (de Lys. Cc. 5). 

ἀκολουθία. 80. Seguence, consequence. Lat. consecutio. Cp. ἀκό- 
λουθος, ἀκολουθεῖν and ἀνακολουθία (all in ὃ 153); also π. ὕψ. c. 22, 1 
and Dionys. Hal. 22. 71. ad Amm. c. 2. See further s.v. μάχη, 
p- 291 infra. 


264. DEMETRIOS ON STYLE 


ἀκρίβεια. 41, 53, 222,274. Technical finish (slightly depreciatory 
in §§ 53, 222, ‘correctness,’ ‘nicety’: cp. 7. ὕψ. Cc. 33, 35, 36). Lat. 
ars exquisita, Fr. style soigné. Similarly ἀκριβὴς (14), ἀκριβῶς (41, 
53, 188), and ἀκριβολογία (209, ‘exact narration’). So Isocr. (Paneg. 
11) contrasts ἀκριβὴς and ἀπηκριβωμένος with ἁπλῶς. This meaning is 
frequently found in Aristotle’s A/eforzc, and also in Dionysius: for 
the latter, see references in D. & p. 184. 


ἀκροατής. 216, 222 (ter), 247. Hearer. But 6 ἀκροατής (and also 
ὃ ἀκούων, e.g. ὃ 216) will often be better translated by ‘the reader,’ 
the rhetorical point of view not being so natural to us as to the 
Greek critics. 


ἀλληγορία. 99, 100, 101 (bis), 102, 151, 296. Adlegory, veiled 
meaning, dark saying. Lat. tmversio (Quintil. vil. 6, 44). Fr. all- 
gorie. Cp. D. ΝΠ. p. 184, π. ὕψ. p. 194. In 7. épp. 100 the word 
ὑπονοεῖν is used in explanation: νῦν δὲ ὥσπερ συγκαλύμματι τοῦ λόγου 
τῇ ἀλληγορίᾳ κέχρηται: πᾶν γὰρ τὸ ὑπονοούμενον φοβερώτερον, καὶ 
ἄλλος εἰκάζει ἄλλο τι. So Aristot. (fez. ili. ττ, 6), quoting the same 
illustration as in 7. ἕρμ. 99, says: Kal τῶν ἀποφθεγμάτων δὲ τὰ ἀστεῖα 
ἐστιν ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὅ φησι λέγειν, οἷον TO Στησιχόρου ὅτι οἱ τέττιγες ἑαυτοῖς 
χαμόθεν acovra. The following passages throw additional light on 
the word and its Latin equivalents: Cic. Ov. 94 ‘iam cum con- 
fluxerunt plures continuae tralationes alia plane fit oratio: itaque 
genus hoc Graeci appellant aAAnyopiav, nomine recte, genere melius 
ille, qui ista omnia tralationes vocat”: cp. de Oy. 11. 41, 166. Quintil. 
Vill. 6, 44 ‘Cat ἀλληγορία, quam zzversionem interpretantur, aut aliud 
verbis aliud sensu ostendit aut etiam interim contrarium.” id. ix. 2, 
46 ““ἀλληγορίαν facit continua metaphora.” The word adAnyopia is 
not found earlier than Philodemus and Cicero: for ὑπόνοια (in the 
same sense), see Plat. Fep. 11. p. 378D. In the general sense of 
Milton’s ‘where more is meant than meets the ear,’ al/egory has 
always been a great instrument in the hands of the masters of litera- 
ture: cp. 7. vy. vil. 3 ἐγκαταλείπειν τῇ διανοίᾳ πλεῖον τοῦ λεγομένου τὸ 
ἀναθεωρούμενον. ‘This figure, therefore, for his duplicitie we call 
the figure of false semblant or dissimulation” (Puttenham Arte of 
English Poesie, p. 155 ed. Haslewood).—Similarly ἀλληγορεῖν (151, 
285), ἀλληγορικὸς (282, 283), ἀλληγορικῶς (243). 


ἀμβλύνειν. 249. 70 take the edge off. Lat. obtundere, hebetare. 


GLOSSARY 265 


ἄμετρος. 4 (bis), 183. Without measure. Lat. sine mensura, 
zusto longior. But in § 183 there is a special reference to verse, just 
as in Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 3 λέξις ἄμετρος = oratio soluta.— 
So ἀμετρία, § 4. 


ἄμουσος. 68. Without charm. Lat. suavitatis expers. 


ἀμφίβολος. 291. Ambiguous. Lat. ambiguus. So ἀμφιβολία, 
§ 196. Cp. Aristot. Poet. xxv. 13. As enforcing Aristotle’s view 
that clearness is the cardinal virtue of style (however little praise it 
may bring), cp. Quintil. vill. 2, 16 “ vitanda in primis ambiguitas, 
non haec solum, de cuius genere supra dictum est, quae incertum 
intellectum facit: ut Chremetem audivi percussisse Demean; sed illa 
quoque, quae, etiamsi turbare non potest sensum, in idem tamen 
verborum vitium incidit, ut si quis dicat, wswm a se hominem librum 
scribentem. nam etiamsi librum ab homine scribi patet: male tamen 
composuerit feceritque ambiguum, quantum in ipso fuit.” See also 
Introduction, pp. 37 ff. 


dvaywyia. 171. Want of breeding. Lat. animus incultus. Cp. 
π. UW. XXXIV. 2 σκώμματα οὐκ apovoa οὐδ᾽ avaywya, and Dionys. Hal. 
de Antig. Or. c. I. 


ἀναδίπλωσις. 66, 140 (bis), 267. Recteration, ‘reduplication’ (‘the 
Redouble, Puttenham). Lat. conduplicatio (Auctor ad Herennium iv. 
c. 28); geminatio (Cic. de Orat. 111. 206) ; tferatio, repetitio (Aquila). 
For good examples (in addition to those quoted in the z. épy. itself, 
and in the note on ὃ 140), cp. Demosth. de Cor. 143 πόλεμον εἰς τὴν 
᾿Αττικὴν εἰσάγεις, Αἰσχίνη, πόλεμον ᾿Αμφικτυονικόν; Eurip. Az. 1085, 
1086 xpovos...... κατθανεῖν (the excessive use of repeated words in 
Euripides is ridiculed by Aristophanes); Hor. Odes 11. 14, 1 “eheu 
fugaces, Postume, Postume, | labuntur anni,” and Odes iv. 4, 70 
“‘occidit, occidit | spes omnis et fortuna nostri | nominis Hasdru- 
bale interempto”; St. Matthew's Gospel xxiii. 37 “Ὁ Jerusalem 
Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets.” The figure is also called 
ἐπαναδίπλωσις, παλιλλογία, érilevéus.—The word avadirdwors is some- 
times used of grammatical reduplication, being defined as πρώτης 
συλλαβῆς διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν συμφώνων συλλαβὴν ποιούντων ἐπάλληλος 


éxopa (Walz Rhet. Gr. iu. 566). 


ἀναπαιστικόςς 189. Anapaestic. Lat. anapaesticus. The metrical 
foot so called. 


266 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


ἀναπαύειν. 1, 45, 202. 70 cause to pause. Lat. sedare. Cp. 
ἀνάπαυλα, ‘resting-place,’ in §§ 46, 202, 205. (ἀνάπαυσις is the usual 
word for ‘pause,’ in the sense of 7 τοῦ λόγου KataAnéts). 

ἀναπληροῦν. 98. 70 wse expletives. Lat. infercire. 

ἀναστρέφειν. 184,185. 700 invert the order. Lat. evertere compo- 
sitionen. 

ἀναφορά. 141,268. Repetition. Lat. repetitio (Auct. ad Herenn. iv. 
13; Quintil. ix. 3, 29). The term is commonly used (as the examples 
in the π. épu. show) of the repetition of a word, or words, in successive 
clauses; and so differs from ἀναδίπλωσις, which is applied to the 
immediate repetition of a word. ‘The strict meaning of the term (as 
shown by the corresponding verb ἀναφέρειν in ὃ 141) is reference 
(Lat. ve/atio), 1.6. the repeated word carries the mind back. See 
further in Sandys’ Orator of Cicero, pp. 137, 138. Puttenham calls 
it the figure of report, “when we make one word begin, and as they 
are wont to say, lead the daunce to many verses in sute.”—In ὃ 72, 
ἀναφορὰ is used in its literal sense of ‘ uplifting.’ 

ἀνειμένος. 19,21. Relaxed, loose (of a period). Lat. remissus. 


ἀνθυπαλλαγή. 60. Substitution. Lat. commutatio. Not strictly 
‘interchange’ of cases, but substitution of one case for another ; e.g. 
in the instance given in § 60, of οἱ δύο σκόπελοι for τῶν δύο σκοπέλων 
(cp. Herod. περὶ σχημάτων, Spengel “het. Gr. 11. 86). Cp. in Eng- 
lish, ‘‘The Power in darkness whom we guess; | I found Him not 
in world or sun” (7271 Memoriam, 21). The term ὑπαλλαγὴ does not 
occur in the z. ép4.—The corresponding verb ἀνθυπαλλάσσειν 15 used 
in§ 59. Both the verb and the noun are late words,—Philo, Apollon. 
Dysc., ete. 

ἀνταπόδοσις. 23, 250. Correspondence, parallelism. Lat. redditio 
contraria (Quintil. vili. 3, 77). So ἀνταποδιδόναι (§§ 53, 79): espe- 
cially used of the convertibility of metaphors, as in Aristot. A/e?. 11. 
4, 4. 

ἀντέρεισις. 12. Propping, buttressing. Lat. fultura. The idea 
(that of interlacing support) is the same as in the words ‘insistere 
invicem’ used by Quintil. viii. 5, 27 ‘‘unde soluta fere oratio et e 
singulis non membris sed frustis collata structura caret, cum illa 
rotunda et undique circumcisa insistere invicem nequeant.” So the 
verb avrepeidew in ὃ 13. 

ἀντίθεσις. 24,171, 172, 247, 250. Antithests, contrast. Lat. con- 
tentio (Auct. ad. Her. iv. 45), contrapositum (= ἀντίθετον, Quintil. ix. 


GLOSSARY 267 


3, 81). The subdivisions of antithesis in 7. ἕρμ. ὃ 22 correspond 
with Rhet. ad Alex. c. 26: cp. D. H. p. 185. In ὅδ 171, 172 ἀντί- 
θεσις seems, as Victorius pointed out, to mean little more than a 
play on words. In §§ 29, 120, 247 ἀντίθετον is found; in ὃ 24 ἄντι- 
θέτως ; in §§ 22, 23, 24, 36 αντικεῖσθαι. Cic. (Or. xxxix. 135) describes 
antithests in the words “‘cum sunt contrariis relata contraria.’ Nor- 
den (Kunstprosa li. 508) quotes some of the striking New Testament 
examples of antithesis (om. 11. 6 ff.; 1 Cor. i. 18, iv. 10 ff.; 2 Cor. 
vi. 7 ff.), together with St Augustine’s comments in de Czv. Dez xi. 18. 
Antithesis has, indeed, been the most generally used of all the 
figures. The merit of an antithetical style (according to Aristot. 
Rhet. 111. g, 8) is that it brings contraries into emphatic juxtaposition, 
and has a syllogistic character. Its use in excess was, it would seem 
from a current journal, disliked by Bishop Westcott in Macaulay, 
whose antithetical style “bears much the same relation to prose that 
rhyme bears to verse: it is a help towards attainment of success of 
the second order; but to supreme excellence it is a hindrance” 
(Lionel Tollemache in Zhe Spectator, August 17th, 1901). 

ἀντίστροφος. 38.  Covverse, counterpart. Lat. respondens. 

ἀνυπόκριτος. 194. OUndramatic. Lat. remotus ab actione, alienus 
ab fustrionia. Late word,—LXX., N. T., Marcus Aurelius. Only 
here in the sense given above ; elsewhere, it = ‘ guileless.’ 

ἀνωμαλία. 67. Sneguality. Lat. tnaegualitas. In ὃ 219 ἀνωμαλία, 


@ 


and in ὃ 246 ἀνώμαλος, have their literal meaning. 

ἀπαγγελίαᾳ. 114. Style. Lat. elocutio. Late in this sense,— 
Dionys. Halic., Plut., Dio Chrys., etc. Theophrastus himself prob- 
ably used the word λέξις. In het. ad Alex. c. 30 ἀπαγγελία = διή- 
yno.s. For ‘narrative’ simply, ἀγγελία is used in ὃ 114 and azay- 
γέλλειν in ὃ 237. In Dion. H. 22. L ad Amm., ἀπαγγέλλειν is used 
repeatedly in the sense of delivering a speech. (Further references 
in Classical Review xv. 253.) 

ἀπάθεια. 194. Lack of emotion. Lat. affectuum vacuitas, tndo- 
lentia. So the adj. ἀπαθής, in the same section. 

ἀπαρτίζειν. 2, 10. Zo round off, to complete. Lat. adaequare, 
absolvere. TMermogenes (Sp. u. 241) defines κῶλον as ἀπηρτισμένη 
διάνοια, ‘a completed sense.’ Cp. the use of συντελεῖν and συμπε- 
ραιοῦν. Schol. Rav. ad Aristoph. Raz. 812: ὅταν γὰρ οἱ δεσπόται 
σπουδάζωσι θᾶττόν τι ἀπαρτισθῆναι (‘to be polished off’) ἐπιπλήττουσι 


τοῖς δούλοις ἵνα θᾶττον ἐνεργῶσιν. 


268 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


ἀπεικάζειν. 11. Zo “ken, to compare. Lat. assimilare, comparare. 


ἀπειρόκαλοςς. 67. Tasteless. Lat. imeptus. Dionys. H. de Lsaeo 
C. 2 πέφευγεν ἀπηρχαιωμένων καὶ σημειωδῶν ὀνομάτων τὴν ἀπειροκαλίαν, 
and D. #. p. 185. 

ἄπειρος. 1,63. Lzmtless. Lat. cnfinitus. 

ἀπίθανος. 15, 19, 221. UOnconvincing, unreal. Lat. alienus a 
persuadendo, non probabilis. Cp. Aristot. Rhet. 111. 8, τ ἀπίθανον" 
πεπλάσθαι yap δοκεῖ, 1.6. ‘artificial,’ ‘hollow.’ See also s.v. πιθανός. 


ἁπλοῖκός. 244. Szmple, naive. Lat. simplex, non fucatus. Late 
word,— Philo, Lucian, etc.—azAovs occurs in §§ 15, 17, etc. ; ἁπλότης 
in ὃ 19; ἁπλῶς in δὲ 100, 243 (see also s. v. ἀκρίβεια). The ars 
celare artem is well described, in connexion with the word ἁπλότης, 
in (Dionys. Hal.) Avs Δ οί. p. 99 (ed. Usener), λέγω δὲ καὶ προστί- 
θημι, ὅτι καὶ ὅταν τις ἁπλῶς λέγῃ, καὶ τοῦτο τέχνῃ σχήματος γίνεται, ἵνα 
ἡ τῆς ἁπλότητος προσποίησις τὸ πιθανὸν ἔχῃ τῷ ἀκούοντι.- Τἰ is to be 
noticed that in ὃ 34 ἁπλοῦς is substituted for Aristotle’s ἀφελής, and 
further that neither ἀφελὴς nor ἀφέλεια Occurs in any part of the 
a. €pu. As the words occur in Dionysius and in Hermogenes, the 
treatise may (so far as such indications are to be trusted at all) be 
assigned to the period between the two. At all events, the appa- 
rently deliberate avoidance of the word ἀφελὴς 15 noteworthy. 


ἀπόθεσις. 19, 205, 245. Fadl (of the voice); cadence. Lat. depo- 
sitio. The distinction implied is that of ἄρσις and θέσις, the rise of 
the voice at the beginning of a member and its fall at the end. 


ἀποίητοςς. 28. J/nartificial. Lat. sine arte factus. In the same 
sense, ateyvitevtos and ἀνεπιτήδευτος (Dionys. Halic. de Lys. c. 8). 

ἀποκοπή. 6, 238. Adbruptness. Lat. abscisto. Cp. Dionys. Hal. 
de Thucyd. c. 52 τὰς ὑπερβάτους καὶ πολυπλόκους καὶ ἐξ ἀποκοπῆς 
πολλὰ σημαίνειν πράγματα βουλομένας καὶ διὰ μακροῦ τὰς ἀποδόσεις 
λαμβανούσας νοήσεις. SO αποκεκομμένος in S§ 18, 238, 239: ep. 
Aristot. “οί. 111. 8, 6 ἀλλὰ δεῖ τῇ μακρᾷ ἀποκόπτεσθαι (‘brought to 
an abrupt end a) καὶ δήλην εἶναι τὴν τελευτήν. 

ἀπόληξις. 121, 182, 257, 268. Conclusion. at. terminatio. So 
ἀπολήγειν S$ 20, 202, 257. 

ἀποπνίγειν. 303. Zo choke: used of long periods which rob the 
speaker of his breath. Lat. suffocare. So πνίγειν in ὃ 1. 

ἀποσιώπησις. 103, 264. Sudden reticence, suppressed clause (‘the 
figure of silence,’ Puttenham). Lat. veéecentia (Quintil. ix. 2, 54: 


GLOSSARY 269 


“ ἀποσιώπησις. quam idem Cicero redicentiam, Celsus obticentiam, non- 
nulli ¢z/erruptionem appellant.” Cicero uses ‘reticentia’ in de O7. 11]. 
53, 205). Fr. réticence. Examples: Demosth. de Cor. ad init., ἀλλ᾽ 
ἐμοὶ μέν---οὐ βούλομαι δὲ δυσχερὲς εἰπεῖν οὐδὲν ἀρχόμενος τοῦ λόγου : 
Virg. Aen. 1. 135 ‘‘quos ego—sed motos praestat componere fluc- 
tus.” —Cp. ἀποσιωπᾶν in δὲ 44, 253 and ἀποσιγᾶν in ὃ 149. 

ἀποφθεγματικός. 9.  Sententious. Lat. sententiosus. See further 
s. v. γνώμη. The adj. is not found earlier than Plutarch. 

ἀπρεπής. 75, 122, 123, 188 (-ws), 238. Unbecoming. Lat. énde- 
corus. See p. 225 supra. 

ἄρθρον. 23. Article: in the grammatical sense. Lat. ardiculus. 
Cp. D. H. pp. 185, 186. The parts of speech mentioned in the 
7. ἕρμ. are ἄρθρον and σύνδεσμος. ῥῆμα does not occur, and ὄνομα 
means ‘word’ rather than ‘noun.’ 

᾿Αριστίππειος. 296. <Aristippean: see ἢ. on p. 258 supra. 


apktikds. 06. Jyztial. Lat. enitialis, principalis. LLate,—Apoll. 
Dysc., Hephaest., Pollux. 

ἁρμονίαι 300. Adjustment of words. Lat. apta structura, con- 
cinna orationts compositio. Cp. 2). H. p. 186. The meaning of the 
word is discussed in Cope’s Jutroduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric 
ΡΡ. 379—387, and (on the musical side) in D. B. Monro’s Modes of 
Ancient Greek Music. 

dpv0pos. 42, 117, 301. Without rhythm. Lat. numeri expers. 
Used in Aristot. Ref. 111. ὃ, 1. 


ἀρχαιοειδϑής. 245. Old-fashioned. Lat. antiquitatem redolens. The 
word is az. eip. Dionysius Hal. (Zp. ad Pomp. c..2, de Comp. Verb. 
C. 23) Uses ἀρχαιοπρεπὴς in much the same sense.—For the meaning 
of οἱ ἀρχαῖοι in the 7. ἑρμ. (67, 175, 244), See n. On p. 224 supra. 

ἀρχή. 39, 56, 192, 196, 268. Beginning: of a clause or sen- 
tence. Lat. principium. 

ἀσάφεια. 201, 254. Obscurity. Lat. obscuritas. So ἀσαφής : 192, 
198, 221, 226. . 

ἄσεμνος. 189. Undignified. Lat. dignitatis expers, minime vene- 
vandus. ate,—Dionys. Hal., Plut., 7. ὕψ., Lucian. (Sometimes 
said to occur in Aristotle, but not found in any genuine writing of 
his.) 

ἀστεῖσμός. 128, 130. Witticism: (‘the merry scoff; otherwise 
the civil jest,’ Puttenham). Lat. urbanitas (ἀστεῖσμοί = facetiae). 


270 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


The word is late,—Dionys. Hal., 7. ὕψ., etc. In the same sense 
ἀστεΐζεσθαι (§ 149), though the particular form seems to be more 
specifically Attic. In ὃ 114 ἀστεῖος is found, but with a moral rather 
than an intellectual connotation. 

ἀσύνδετον. -192, 268. Absence of conjunctions. Lat. dissolutum 
(Auct. ad Herennium iv. 30: cp. Quintil. ix. 3, 50). See also 5. v. 
λύσις. 


ἀσυνήθης. 77, 190, 208, 221. CUnusual. Lat. inusztatus. 


ἀσφαλής. 19, 41, 78, etc. Safe. Lat. ¢utus. Especially applied 
to a ‘safe,’ as opposed to a ‘risky’ (κινδυνώδης), use of language. In 
the same way ἀσφαλίζεσθαι (85, 193) means ‘to ensure,’ ‘to safe- 
guard,’ ‘to place beyond criticism’: late,—Polybius, Diodorus, 
Josephus, N. T. Cp. ἀσφάλεια, § 287. 

doxnpatictos. 67. One who avoids figures. Lat. gui nullis 
guris utitur. Late in this sense,—Dionys. Hal., Quintil., etc. 
Co Qs “7. Ρ. USC: 


ἀτακτοτέρως. 903. With some negligence. Lat. inordinatius. The 
comparative, in this form, is az. <ip. 

ἀτερπής. 134, 303, 304. Daesagrecable, disgusting. Lat. insuavis, 
odtosus. 

ἀτέχνως. 68. Jnartistically. Lat. sene arte, inartificialiter.— 
ἀτεχνῶς (‘simply,’ ‘entirely’) is found in §§ τ, 5, 68, 71, 266. It 
will be noticed that the word occurs twice in § 68, and that every- 
where (except in ὃ 1) P gives the accent not as ἀτεχνῶς but as 
ἀτέχνως. Probably the distinction by accent is arbitrary in origin, 
though convenient in practice.—ateyvas (= ἀληθῶς) was regarded as 
specifically Attic. 

ἀττικίζεν. 177. Zo write in the Attic dialect. Lat. atticissare. 
In the same section ᾿Αττικὴ γλῶσσα is used, and in § 175 the practice 
of οἱ ᾿Αττικοὶ is mentioned. 

αὐτοσχεδιάζειν. 224. Zo improvise. Lat. ex tempore facere s. 
dicere. Cp. Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 25 πολλὰ yap αὐτοσχε- 
διάζει μέτρα ἡ φύσις, and Aristotle’s use of αὐτοσχεδιάσματα in Poetics 
c. 4. The word is classed as specifically Attic by the ancient 
grammarians. 

αὐτοφυής. 27, 300. Sedfengendered, spontaneous, natural. Lat. 
naturalis. ‘The same idea is expressed by the words guae sua sponte 
nascuntur and imnatus in the following passages: Tac. Dial. de Or. 


GLOSSARY 271 


c. 6 ‘sed extemporalis audaciae atque ipsius temeritatis vel prae- 
cipua iucunditas est; nam in ingenio quoque, sicut in agro, quam- 
quam grata quae diu serantur atque elaborentur, gratiora tamen 
quae sua sponte nascuntur;” Quintil. ix. 3, 74 “nam per se frigida 
et inanis affectatio, cum in acres incidit sensus, innatam gratiam 
videtur habere, non arcessitam.” 


ἀφρόντιστος. 300. Unstudied. Lat. encuriosus. Sees. v. φροντίς. 


ἄχαρις. 137, 189, 302, 303, 304. Graceless, uncouth, coarse. Lat. 
mmvenustus.—In a similar sense axdpitos in S§ 130, 139; with the 
same doubt, as to the termination -ἰτὸς or -toros, which presents itself 
In ἐπιχάριτος and εὐχάριστος. 


ἄψυχος. 81. Snanimate. Lat. animae expers, inanimus. Used 
here in its literal sense, as the opposite of ἔμψυχος in the same 
section ; not applied in the π. ἑρμ. to “feless writing, Lat. exsanguts. 


βάσανος. 201. Torture. Lat. guaestio, poena. A late word in 
the metaphorical sense,—LXX., N. T., Lucian, etc.; applied to 
language itself in 7. vy. x. 6 τῷ μὲν συνεμπίπτοντι πάθει TO ἔπος ὁμοίως 


᾿ 
ἐβασάνισεν. 


βάσις. 206. Step. Lat. clausula. For βάσις as meaning a 
rhythmical clause, see Cope’s Jntroduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric 
p- 388, ἢ. 4: “βάσις in rhythm corresponds to ποῦς in metre. It 
takes its name from the ‘step’ in marching or dancing.” To the 
passages there quoted from Plato and Aristotle may be added z. ww. 
XXXIX. 2 καὶ βάσιν ἐνδούς τινα ῥυθμοῦ πρὸς ταύτην ἀναγκάζει (SC. ὁ αὐλὸς) 
βαίνειν ἐν ῥυθμῷ, where βάσις ῥυθμοῦ clearly -- ‘numeri incessus.’ 
The ‘safe step’ is one of which the penultimate syllable is long, in 
contradistinction to iambic endings which are regarded by Dionysius 
as ἀνέδραστοι and ἀπερίγραφοι (Blass, “121. Bereds.” i. 135 n. 2). 


Bia. 246. Violent movement. Lat. violentia. τὸ δύσφθογγον is 
here meant by 7 βία, as the context shows. 


βούλεσθαι. 2,28, 231. 70. be designed, to tend. Lat. velle. Cp. 
JD), Jak, Os πῶς 


βραχυλογία. 243. Brevity of speech. Lat. breviloguentia. Cp. 
Quintil. vil. 3, 82 “ac merito laudatur brevitas integra; sed ea 
minus praestat, quotiens nihil dicit nisi quod necesse est (Bpaxv- 
λογίαν vocant, quae reddetur inter schemata), est vero pulcherrima, 
cum plura paucis complectitur.” So βραχυλογεῖν (δ 242), and βραχυ- 
λόγος (S§ 7, 214). For the βραχυλογία of the Lacedaemonians, see 


272 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


Plut. Zycurg. Vit. c. 19; theirs was the drevitas imperatoria of 
Tacitus (7757. τ. 18).—Bpaxirys occurs in §§ 9, 121; βραχὺς in 207, 
242. 

γελοῖος. 126, 163, 170, etc. Laughable. Lat. ridiculus. The 
difference between τὸ γελοῖον and τὸ εὔχαρι is explained in ὃ 163. 
The deprecating attitude which so many ancient writers assumed 
towards laughter is reflected in Quintil. vi. 3.—yéAws occurs in 
δὲ 168, 169; γελᾶν, 163, 168, 260; γελωτοποιΐα, 128; γελωτοποιεῖν, 
24, 168. 

γλαφυρός. 36, 127, 128, 138, 178, 179, 183, 184, 186.  Srnooth, 
polished, elegant: χαρακτὴρ γλαφυρὸς being one of the four types of 
style. Lat. politus, floridus, ornatus, elegans. Fr. élégant, orné. Cp. 
Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 23 ἡ δὲ γλαφυρὰ καὶ ἀνθηρὰ σύνθεσις : 
and de adm. vi dic. in Dem. c. 40 ἡ δὲ peta ταύτην ἡ γλαφυρὰ καὶ 
θεατρικὴ καὶ TO κομψὸν (‘neat’) αἱρουμένη πρὸ τοῦ σεμνοῦ (‘grand’) 
τοιαύτη: ὀνομάτων αἰεὶ βούλεται λαμβάνειν τὰ λειότατα καὶ μαλακώτατα, 
τὴν εὐφωνίαν θηρωμένη καὶ τὴν εὐμέλειαν, ἐξ αὐτῶν δὲ τὸ ἡδύ. It is to 
be noted that many of the illustrations of this style given in the 
π. ἑρμ. are taken from the lyric and comic poets. Reference may 
also be made to J. H. p. 18 and z. wy. p. 196.—The noun yAadv- 
ρότης occurs in ὃ 258. 

γλῶσσα. 177. Dialect. Lat. lingua, dialectus.—The word does 
not in the π᾿ ἑρμ. bear the Aristotelian sense (Poetics and Rhetoric) 
of ‘foreign term’: for which see D. ZH. p. 187, 5. v. γλωττηματικός. 


γνώμη. 9 (bis), 110, 170. AZaxim. Lat. sententia. The prin- 
ciple of the γνώμη is expounded by Aristotle (Red. 11. 21, 15): ἡ μὲν 
yap γνώμη, ὥσπερ εἴρηται, ἀπόφανσις καθόλου ἐστίν, χαίρουσι δὲ 
καθόλου λεγομένου ὃ κατὰ μέρος προὐπολαμβάνοντες τυγχάνουσι" οἷον εἴ 
τις γείτοσι τύχοι κεχρημένος ἢ τέκνοις φαύλοις, ἀποδέξαιτ᾽ ἂν τοῦ εἰπόντος 
« οὐδὲν γειτονίας χαλεπώτερον᾽ ἢ ὅτι “ οὐδὲν ἡλιθιώτερον τεκνοποιίας, 
ὥστε δεῖ στοχάζεσθαι πῶς τυγχάνουσι ποῖα προὐπολαμβάνοντες, εἶθ᾽ 
οὕτως περὶ τούτων καθόλου λέγειν. ταύτην τε δὴ ἔχει μίαν χρῆσιν τὸ 
γνωμολογεῖν, καὶ ἑτέραν κρείττω: ἠθικοὺς γὰρ ποιεῖ τοὺς λόγους. The 
γνώμη may be said to differ in these two points (viz. general applica- 
tion and moral purpose) from the ἀπόφθεγμα, which is a dictum or 
bon mot, and is specially used of the Λακωνικὰ ἀποφθέγματα, men- 
tioned by Aristotle (@4e/. 11. 21, 8) and collected by Plutarch. On 
the use of γνῶμαι by Demosthenes there are some good remarks in 
Rehdantz-Blass, Rhetorischer und stilistischer Index pp. 20, 21.— 


GLOSSARY 273 


γνωμολογεῖν occurs in ὃ 232, and γνωμολογικὸς in§ 9. The latter is 
late, occurring (if we except the “het. ad Alex.) not earlier than 
Theon’s Progymnasmata. But γνωμολογεῖν and γνωμολογία are found 
in Aristotle’s Rhetoric. 


γράμμα. 48,69, etc. Letter: of the alphabet. Lat. /ttera. 


γραφή. 120, 196, 215, 226. Writing, composition (in the wide 
sense). Lat. scriptio. This use is found in Philodemus and Strabo. 
In § 226, stress is laid on the distinction between written and spoken 
style: in fact, the γραφικὴ λέξις of ὃ 193 is kept in view. (In 
$76 γραφικὸς means ‘pictorial,’ as ζωγραφικὸς in the same section.) 
Cpe ΠΡ Τὴ: 

γρῖφος. 153. Dark saying. Lat. griphus. The γρῖφος is thus 
distinguished from the αἴνιγμα by Schol. Anstid. p. 508: γρῖφος δέ 
ἐστιν οὐχ, ὡς ἐνιοί φασι, ταὐτὸν τῷ αἰνίγματι" διαφέρουσι γάρ, ὅτι τὸ μὲν 
αἴνιγμα ὁμολογεῖ τις ἀγνοεῖν, τὸν δὲ γρῖφον ἀγνοεῖ δοκῶν ἐπίστασθαι, 
οἷον αἴνιγμα μέν ἐστι τὸ τί δίπουν, τί τρίπουν, τί τετράπουν; ἐνταῦθα 
δῆλον τὸ ἐρώτημα. γρῖφος δὲ οἷον Ἕκτορα τὸν ἸΤριάμου Διομήδης ἔκτανεν 
avyp. ἐνταῦθα δοκεῖ μὲν εἰδέναι τὸ ῥηθέν, ἀγνοεῖ δέ, ὅτι διομήδης ἣν 
ἀνὴρ ὃ ᾿Αχιλλεύς. Thus the one frankly presents itself as an enigma, 
riddle or conundrum ; while the other, with its element of ambiguity 
and mystification, is an éguzvogue or double entendre. 


δασύς. 73. Rough: breathing (jxos). Lat. asper: sc. spiritus. 
Cpe D ἘΠΕ 0. το: 
δεικτικός. 289. Demonstrative. Lat. demonstrativus. 


δεινός. 7, Sff.; 240ff; passim. Forcible, vigorous, vehement: 
χαρακτὴρ δεινὸς being one of the four types of style. Lat. gravis, 
uehemens. Fr. énergique, vehément.—Reference may be made to 
D. H. pp. 187, 188 5. v. δεινότης. With the passage there quoted 
(on p. 188) from Dionys. Hal. ad Amm. 11. may be compared 7. épp. 
§ 283 πᾶσα δὲ ἔκπληξις δεινόν, ἐπειδὴ φοβερόν; ὃ 255 ἀλλ᾽ οὔτ᾽ ἂν ὃ 
λέγων δεινὸς (‘formidable’) οὕτως ἔδοξεν, οὔτε ὃ ὄφις αὐτός ; § 241 τὸ 
γὰρ μῆκος ἐκλύει τὴν σφοδρότητα, τὸ δὲ ἐν ὀλίγῳ πολὺ ἐμφαινόμενον 
δεινότερον (cp. ὃ 274). Perhaps in the π. ἑρμ. (as compared with the 
Scripta Rhetorica of Dionysius) δεινότης carries with it less of that 
idea of hitting the mark which is so well illustrated from Plato and 
Aristotle by Rehdantz (of. at. p. 57). In Dionysius (as later in 
Hermogenes) the word sums up the oratorical virtues, especially as 
seen in Demosthenes. In the 7. ἑρμ., it is only one of four types of 


R. 18 


274 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


style ; it is indeed chiefly illustrated by examples drawn from Demo- 
sthenes, but it is not associated solely with him, as appears from the 
expressions τῆς Δημαδείου δεινότητος (ὃ 286) and ἡ viv κατέχουσα 
δεινότης (δ 245). Cp. p. 52 supra. 

δεινότης Occurs in ὃ 240 and passim (the plural δεινότητας being 
found in ὃ 243: cp. μεγέθη ὃ 5).---δείνωσις in ὃ 130 means ‘intensifi- 
cation’: cp. Quintil. vi. 2, 24 “‘haec est illa, quae δείνωσις vocatur, 
rebus indignis, asperis, invidiosis addens vim oratio; qua virtute 
praeter alias plurimum Demosthenes valuit.” 


δημιουργός. 215. <Artificer. Lat. opifex. Cp. Plat. Gorg. 453A 
πειθοῦς δημιουργὸς ἡ ῥητορικὴ (Gorgias’ definition of rhetoric). 

Δημάδεια. 282. Sayings of the orator Demades. Lat. dicta De- 
madca. Cp. τῆς Δημαδείου δεινότητος, ὃ 286. 


δημοτικός. 177, 292. Popular: applied to the Attic dialect and 
to proverbs. Lat. popularis, communis. In ὃ 294 ὁ ᾿Αθηναίων δῆμος 
is used of the Athenian democracy. 


διάλογος. 223 (bis), 224. Dzalogue. Lat. dialogus. So διαλο- 
yexos In S§ 19, 21, which may be conveniently rendered ‘ conversa- 
tional,’ though the illustration employed in § 21 shows that the 
formal Dialogue is chiefly meant. διαλέγεσθαι occurs in S$ 167, 225, 
289 ; while in ὃ 167 χορὸς διαλεκτικὸς Means a ‘conversational chorus’ 
of the Gilbertian type. Cp. R. Hirzel Der Dialog 1 pp. 305, 306. 

διαλύειν. 13,15, 21, 46, 192, 193, 271, 301. 70 break up. Lat. 
dissolvere. The perf. participle pass. is found in several of these 
sections, with the same sense as διῃρημένος (p. 275 infra). In view of 
the meaning borne by διαλύειν elsewhere in the 7. épp., the reading 
διαλύσαντας in ὃ 288 seems unlikely.—duadAvors = asyndeton, δὰ 66, 269. 


διάνοια. 2 (quinquies), 3 (quater), 30, 38, 44 et passim. Thought, 
sentence. Lat. sententia. διανόημα, ‘thought’ or ‘notion,’ in S§ 30, 
239. 

διάρριψις. 68. Severance: used of style. Lat. dzstractio. Cp. 
the use of διερριμμένος in ὃ 13. 

διασπασμός. 68. Daslocation: of style. Lat. dzvulsio. Late 
word,—LXX., Plutarch, etc. Cp. the use of διεσπασμένος in ὃ 303. 

Siardtrev. 59. 70 place in order. Lat. digerere, ordine collocare. 
Fr. ordonner. 


διαχωρίζειν. 180. Zo divide. Lat. separare. 


GLOSSARY 275 


διδασκαλία. 9. Formal instruction. Lat. docendt ratio. Cp. 
Aristot. Poet. xix. 3 τὰ μὲν δεῖ φαίνεσθαι avev διδασκαλίας. 


διήγημα. 8, 187, 291, 241, 270. A narrative. Lat. narratio. 
Fr. γέεκέ. Late,—LXX., Polyb., Dionys. Hal.; though the adj. 
διηγηματικὸς is thrice used in the latter part of the Poetics. διήγησις 
occurs in 7. ἕρμ. 291. The distinction drawn between the two words 
by a scholiast (quoted in Volkmann’s “heforik, p. 150 ἢ. 1) is: 
διαφέρει δὲ (διήγημα) διηγήσεως, τῷ ταύτην μὲν εἶναι καθολικωτέραν, 
ἐκεῖνο δὲ μερικώτερον. The same distinction holds between ποίησις 
and ποίημα, the former being appropriately applied (say) to the entire 
Lliad, the latter to Book xvi. (Ὁπλοποιία). 


διημαρτημένος. 114, 186, 236, 302. Defective, distorted. Lat. 
w2tlosus. 

διῃρημένος. 12, 21, 70. Resolved, disjointed, loose. Lat. divisus, 
aissolutus. (Also διαιρεῖ and διαιρεῖται in ὃ 1, διαιρεθέντα in ὃ 70; in 
§ 1 ‘to joint,’ or ‘to articulate,’ is perhaps nearer the meaning than 
‘to disjoint,’ which is more depreciatory than the Greek original.) 
See Aristot. ez. 11. 9, 7 (with Cope’s note); Cope’s /nxtroduction, 
pp- 306ff.; Ernesti, Zexzcon Technologiae Graecorum Rhetoricae, 
pp. 74, 75. Aristotle (2/ez. ill. 9, 1) distinguishes the λέξις εἰρομένη 
(= διῃρημένη, διαλελυμένη, διερριμμένη in π. épy.) from the λέξις κατε- 
στραμμένη. For Herodotus as the leading representative of the λέξις 
εἰρομένη, Cp. Norden Kuztsprosa, 1. pp. 27, 38—41; Navarre Lssaz 
sur la Rhétorigque grecque avant Aristote, pp. 86, 112; Sandys /socr. 
Dem. et Panegyr., Ὁ. xi. Some useful references to Cicero’s rhe- 
torical works will be found in Causeret Etude sur la langue de la 
Rheéetorique et de la critique littéraire dans Cicéron, pp. 20, 148. 


διθύραμβος. 78. Dithyrambic poetry. Lat. dithyrambus. Also 
διθυραμβώδης 116, διθυραμβικὸς 143, διθυραμβικῶς Qt. 


δίκωλοςς 34, 252. With two ‘members.’ Lat. bemembris. 


διλογία. 103, 211, 212. Repetition. Lat. zteratio, repetitio. So 
διλογεῖν 197, 267. It is clear from S$ 211, 212 that the repetitions 
meant are such as those found in the following English examples: 
‘‘Cannon to right of them, | Cannon to left of them, | Cannon in 
front of them | Volley’d and thunder’d” (Tennyson Charge of the 
Light Brigade) ; “ΒΥ my saying she saith to you, in your ears she 
saith, | Who hear these things, | Put no trust in men’s royalties, nor 
in great men’s breath, | Nor words of kings” (Swinburne Swfer 


18—2 


276 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


Flumina Babylonis) ; “Stars in the firmament above him beaming, | 
Stars in the firmament, alive and free, | Stars, and of stars the 
innumerable streaming, ' Deep in the deeps, a river in the sea” 
(F. W. H. Myers Sant Paul). The second of these passages 1s, 
perhaps, the best illustration of διλογία, as distinguished from the 
other figures denoting rhetorical repetition. Cp. the repetition of 
“days” and “years” in Genesis xlvu. 9 “‘The days of the years of 
my pilgrimage are an hundred and thirty years: few and evil have 
the days of the years of my life been, and have not attained unto the 
days of the years of the life of my fathers in the days of their 
pilgrimage.” So also Book of Daniel 111. 1—18. 

διπλοῦς. 61, 93, 98,191. Double, compound. Lat. duplex. Cp. 
Aristot. Poet. xxi. 1; ARhet. ill. 3, 1. So the verb διπλοῦν in 59, and 
the noun δίπλωσις in 116. : 

δίφθογγος. 72, 73, 207. Having a double sound, a diphthong. 
Lat. adiphthongus. 

δρᾶμα. 62, 156. Action, play. Lat. fabula. The use of the 
word δρᾶμα with reference to the αι and to Sophron’s Mimes is 
interesting: cp. the article by Mr H. Richards in the Classical 
Review xiv. pp. 388—393. For the //ad, cp. π. vw. ix. 13 τῆς μὲν 
Ἰλιάδος γραφομένης ἐν ἀκμῇ πνεύματος ὅλον τὸ σωμάτιον δραματικὸν 
ὑπεστήσατο. 

δυσήκοος.ς. 48. Unpleasant to the ear. Lat. molestus auribus. 
Hardly found with this meaning elsewhere; and a late word al- 
together. 


δυσκατόρθωτος.ς. 127. Hard to accomplish. Lat. gui recte effict vix 
potest. LLate,—Galen, Chrysostom, etc. 


δυσπαρακολούθητος. 4. Hard to follow, unintelligible. Lat. obscu- 
rus. Cp. D. Hf. p. 189. 


δύσφθογγος. 246. Harsh-sounding. Lat. asper, difficilis enuntiatu. 
The word is not found elsewhere. 

Sichwvos. 69, 70, 105. Harsh-sounding. Lat. asper, difficilis 
enuntiatu. A late word, found elsewhere only in Pollux. Late also 
is δυσφωνία, δὲ 48, 105. 

Swpttev. 177. Zo write in the Doric dialect. Lat. sermone ult 
Dorico. Cp. Δωρισμός, in the same section. 

ἐγκατάσκευοςς. 16. Llaborate, embellished. Lat. arte fabricatus, 
elaboratus artificiose, cultu exornatus. Fr. travaillt. Cp. D. FH. 


GLOSSARY Oe, 


Ῥ. 189 for illustrative passages, and see p. 194 767d. for κατασκευὴ 
and κατασκευάζω, which do not occur in the z. épp. 


ἐγκώμιον. 170, 301. Lulogy. Lat. J/audatio. Fr. éoge. So 
ἐγκωμιαστικὸς 120, and ἐγκωμιάζειν in the same section. ἔπαινος 
occurs in δὲ 168, 292, 295 ; when this is distinguished from ἐγκώμιον, 
it means commendation for isolated acts rather than a sustained 
eulogy. 


ἕδρα. 183, 206. Foundation. Lat. sedes. By ἕδρα is meant a 
termination (of a clause or period) containing some long syllables. 
Cp. Dionys. Hal. de adm. vi dic. in Dem. c. 38 ὀνόμασι χρῆσθαι φιλεῖ 
μεγάλοις Kal μακροσυλλάβοις * * καὶ ταῖς ἕδραις αὐτῶν εἶναι πλουσίως 
πάνυ βεβηκυίαις : 1014. c. 40 εὐκόρυφοι δὴ φαίνονται (sc. of ῥυθμοὶ) καὶ 
εὔγραμμοι διὰ τοῦτο καὶ εἰς ἕδραν ἀσφαλῆ τελευτῶσι: id. de Comp. 
Verb. c. 23 οὐ ζητεῖ (sc. ἡ γλαφυρὰ σύνθεσις) καθ᾽ ἕκαστον ὄνομα ἐκ 
περιφανείας δρᾶσθαι, οὐδὲ ἐν ἕδρᾳ πάντα βεβηκέναι πλατείᾳ τε καὶ 
ἀσφαλεῖ, οὐδὲ μακροὺς τοὺς μεταξὺ αὐτῶν εἶναι χρόνους, οὐδ᾽ ὅλως τὸ 


βραδὺ καὶ σταθερὸν τοῦτο φίλον αὐτῇ. 


ἑδραῖος. 19. Stable, well-based. Lat. stabilis, tmmotus. Cp. π. 
wy. xl. 4 πρὸς ἑδραῖον διαβεβηκότα μέγεθος. 

εἶδος. 20, 21, et passim. Form, kind. Lat. forma, species. Cp. 
π wW., Pp. 197. 

εἰκασία. 80 (quinquies), 89 (ter), 160, 172 (bis), 273. Compari- 
sons, similes. Lat. comparatio, similitudo. So εἰκάζειν, ‘to liken,’ 
δὰ 84, 160, 251. In ὃ 227 εἰκὼν is used for ‘image,’ ‘reflection,’ 
‘mirror. Cp. Quintil. vill. 6, Auct. ad Her. iv. 34. 


εἱρμός. 182. Zracn, series. Lat. nexus, series. Cp. π. vw. XXxil. I 


Ν > col Ν ΄ » ε ~ SE 
τὴν ἐκ TOV κατὰ φύσιν εἱρμοῦ τάξιν. 


εἰρωνεία. 291 (bis). Assumed ignorance, dissembling: ‘the dry 
mock,’ Puttenham. Lat. 2/usio, simulatio. Cp. Aquila Rom. (Halm, 
p- 24) “εἰρωνεία, simulatio, frequentissima apud oratores figura, ubi 
aliud verbis significamus, aliud re sentimus”’; and Rhetor. ad Alex. 
21 εἰρωνεία δέ ἐστι λέγειν τι μὴ προσποιούμενον λέγειν, ἢ ἐν τοῖς ἐναντίοις 
ὀνόμασι τὰ πράγματα προσαγορεύειν. It is to be noticed that Philo- 
demus (περὶ κακιῶν x. 22, 38) uses ἀμφίβολος of expressions such as 
ὦ γενναῖε which exemplify the Attic εἰρωνεία. 


ἔκτασις. 185, 206, 207. Lxtension: especially applied to the 
lengthening of short syllables. Lat. extenszo, productio. The verb 


278 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


ἐκτείνειν is found in §§ 6, 8, 9 (here the middle voice is given by P: 
perhaps wrongly), 183, 202, 241. 

ἐκτίθεσθαι. 35, 41, 200. 700 set forth, guote, expound. Lat. expo- 
nere. So ἔκθεσις in ὃ 231. 

ἐκφέρειν. 94, 124, 142, 164, 176, 220. Zo utter: with various 
cognate meanings. Lat. edere, promere. 

exppatev. 165. Zo elaborate. Lat. verbis ornare, ornate aliquid 
enuntiare. ‘(he term ἔκφρασις seems to belong to the later rhetorical 
age—that of the προγυμνάσματα. 

ἐκφωνεῖν. 15. 700 pronounce, to deliver. Lat. pronuntiare, clara 
voce edere. (ἐκφώνησις is sometimes used not only for ‘pronuncia- 
tion,’ but also for ‘exclamation’ and in later times for the ‘peroration 
of a sermon.’) 

ἐμβολή. 39. Zmpact. Lat. cniectio, impetus. If the text is sound, 
the literal meaning seems to be, ‘because the very impact of the 
member must be both an impressive beginning and (an impressive) 
end.’ But the καὶ before τὴν ἐμβολὴν is unnatural, and ἀρχὴν may 
be a gloss on ἐμβολὴν, though the real meaning of the word is 
‘impact’ rather than ‘opening’: cp. 7. vw. xx. 2, 3, where (as here) 
ἐμβολὴ and πλήσσειν are found together. 


ἐμμελῶς. 297. Tastefully. Lat. eleganter. In its sense of ‘tune- 
ful’ or ‘harmonious,’ ἐμμελὴς occurs in Dionys. Hal. de Comp. c. 25 
TH ἐμμέτρῳ καὶ ἐμμελεῖ λέξει. The word ἔμμετρος is found in π. épp. 
§ 183: cp. D. & p. 190. 

ἐμπαθῶς. 28. With emotion, with feeling. Lat. cum affectu. 


ἔμφασις. 47, 57, 180, 171, etc. Appearance, hint, impression, etc. 
Lat. species, significatio. The corresponding verb ἐμφαίνειν is em- 
ployed some twenty or thirty times in the treatise, e.g. ὃ 171. ἐμφαν- 
τικός, ‘indicative,’ occurs in ὃ 283; and ἐμφατικός, ‘striking,’ in ὃ 51 
(the difference in spelling being apparently designed). Both ἐμφαν- 
τικὸς and ἐμφατικὸς are late,—Plutarch, etc. <A figure of ἔμφασις was 
recognised: cp. Volkm. “fet.” pp. 445, 446; Quintil. vil. 3, 83, 
ix. 2, 3; Tiber. z. oynu. and Tryph. z. τρόπων (Sp. Phet. Gr. iil. 65 
and 199). 

ἐναγώνιος. 193. Combative. Lat. aptus contentionibus, accinctus 
ad certamen. Cp. references given in 7. vy. p. 194. 

ἐναλλάσσειν. 60. Zo vary, to substitute. Lat. immutare. The 
literal meaning in § 60 is ‘with the grammatical case thus varied’ 


GLOSSARY 279 


(i.e. with the nominative substituted for the more obvious genitive). 
Cp. D. H. p. 190, s. v. ἐναλλαγή. 


ἐνάργεια. 208, etc. Vividness. Lat. evidentia, tlustratio. Fr. 
évidence. See π. ὕψ. p. 197 and D. H. p. τ9ο, with the examples 
there quoted. The words ἐνάργεια and ἐναργὴς (ὃ 50, etc.) correspond 
to such English words as ‘realism,’ ‘life-like,’ ‘telling,’ ‘graphic.’ Cp. 
Rhet. Lat. Min. (p. 62, Halm): “ἐνάργεια est figura, qua formam 
rerum et imaginem ita oratione substituimus, ut lectoris oculis prae- 
sentiaeque subiciamus.” 

ἐνέργεια. 81, 82. Activity, actuahty. Lat. activ. Cp. Aristot. 
Rhet. iii. τα, 1—3. with Cope’s notes ad loc. and his Lntroduction, 
pp. 316, 318. So ἐνεργεῖν § 81, and ἐνεργὴς ὃ 266. 


ἐνθύμημα. 30, 31, 32, 33, 109. Lxthymeme. Lat. enthymema, 
sometimes vatiocinatio. Cp. D. H. p. 19° for various references, to 
which should be added Cope’s Lntroduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric 
ῬΡ. tor ff., and De Quincey’s “Essay on Aristotle’s View of Rhe- 
toric” (where he follows Pacius and Facciolati). The author of the 
π. ἕρμ. marks clearly the distinction between the enthymeme and the 
period, the latter referring to the form, the former to the content 
whether conveyed in a period or not. It is noteworthy, as probably 
pointing to the use of a common source, that Quintil. (v. 14, 4) 
draws the same illustration from Demosthenes as is found in π. épp. 
§ 31: “optimum autem videtur enthymematis genus, cum in propo- 
sitione dissimili vel contraria ratio subiungitur, quale est Demo- 
sthenis, zon enim, si quid unguam contra leges actum est, idque tu es 
imitatus, tdcirco te convenit poena liberari; quin ὁ contrario damnari 
multo magis. nam ut, 51 guis eorum dammnatus esset, tu haec non 
seripsisses ; ita, damnatus tu si fueris, non scribet alius.” See further 
S. V. μάχη; Pp. 291 infra. 

ἐντέχνως. 67. Artistically. Lat. artificiose. Cp. ἀτέχνως. 


ἐνυφαίνειν. 166. Zo weave into the texture (of a poem). Lat. 
intexere. 

ἐξαίρειν. 119, 122, 123, 234, etc. 70 exalt, to heighten: of style, 
and the like. Lat. eferre. 


ἑξάμετρον. 1, 4, 12, 204. A dine (sc. ἔπος) consisting of six metres 
or measures, a hexameter. Wat. hexametrum. 


ἐξαπλοῦν. 254. Zo unfold, to state outright. Lat. explicare, 
explanare, distincte aliquid exponere. Cy. the paraphrase of Gregor. 


280 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


Cor. (Walz, vil. 2, 1170) δεινότερον yap τὸ ὑπονοούμενον, τὸ δὲ ἐξαπλωθὲν 
καταφρονεῖται, Kal γελοῖον τὸ πρόδηλον λέγειν. A late word in prose, 
—Sextus Empiricus, εἴς. ; the fact that it occurs in the Batrachomyo- 
machia (1. 106) may be added to the other indications of late date 
which that poem presents. 


ἐξασθενεῖν. 50. 70 fail in strength. Lat. deficere. 


ἐξηλλαγμένος. 77. Dastinguished, elaborate. Lat. itmmutatus, va- 
_ riatus, exornatus. Cp. D. H. p. τοι. 


ἐπαμφοτερίζειν. 176, 291. 70 partake of two characters, to be 
ambiguous. Lat. anceps esse. 


ἐπανάληψις. 196 (bis). Lpanalepsis, resumption (‘echo sound,’ 
Puttenham). Lat. zferatio (cp. Rutilius Lupus, Halm p. 8). By 
ἐπανάληψις the author of the π. ἑρμ. seems to understand not simply 
a ‘repetition’ (ἀναδίπλωσις, and the like), but what might be termed 
a ‘resumptive repetition.’ 

ἐπανάστασις. 278. LRzse in rhetorical tone. Lat. elata compositio, 
oratio assurgens. The metaphor may be medical, that of a ‘rising’ 
or ‘swelling’ on the person. 

ἔπαναφορά. 61 (bis), 268. Recurrence, repetition. Lat. repetitio. 
Identical with ἀναφορὰ (q. v.), as may be seen from § 268. The 
corresponding verb éravadépew occurs in §§ 59, 268. 


ἐπιδείκνυσθαι. 225, 300. Zo make a rhetorical display. Lat. se 
ostentare, declamare. 

The reference is to the ἐπιδεικτικὸν γένος, ‘l’éloquence d’apparat.’ 
In ὃ τοῦ, ἐπιδείγματα is used of the appointments in the mansions of 
the rich. 


ἐπίθετον. 85. An addition, an epithet (‘the qualifier,’ Putten- 
ham). Lat. ad nomen adiunctum, appositum (Quintil. vill. 3, 43; 
6, 29). Cp D. H. p. 191. 

ἐπικερτόμημα. 111. A faunt. Lat. obiurgatio, WHerodian (π. 
oxnp., Sp. ili. 92) classifies ἐπικερτόμησις under εἰρωνεία: τῆς δὲ 
εἰρωνείας καθέστηκεν εἴδη τὰ λεπτομερέστερα τάδε, σαρκασμός, διασυρ- 
μός, ἐπικερτόμησις, κατάγελως, εἰκασμός, χαριεντισμός. Rufinianus 
(Halm Ret. Lat. Min. p. 39) says: “ haec figura risum excitat et 
severe proposita vafre excutit.” A similar ‘figure’ of ἐπιτίμησις was 
sometimes recognised: cp. the use of ἐπιτιμᾶν in ὃ 294. 


ἐπικοσμεῖν. 106 (ter), 183. 70 adorn, to embellish. J.at. ornare. 


GLOSSARY 281 


ἐπιλέγειν. 32, 109, 111, 137. Zo make an additional statement, to 
add. Lat. adiungere. 

ἐπιμονή. 280. Ondwelling, lingering, elaboration (‘the figure of 
abode,’ Puttenham). Lat. commoratio (Auct. ad Her. iv. 45, Cic. 
de Orat. iii. 53). Cp. 7. vy. p. 199. What is meant is ‘a fuller 
expression of the point’; the repetition is of the sense, rather than 
simply of the words. 

ἔπιπληθύεσθαι. 156. 70 superabound. Lat. accrescere. The verb, 
in this form, occurs only here: ἐπιπληθύνειν is, however, found in the 
LXxX. 

ἔπιστολικός. 2238, 230, 233. Lpistolary, suited to letter-writing. 
Lat. epistolaris, accommodatus epistolis. 


ἐπισφαλής. 27, 80, 98, 286, 294. Dangerous. Lat. lubricus, 
periculosus. Cf. the use of κινδυνώδης and ἀσφαλὴς in ὃ 80, and see 
S. V. ἀσφαλής, p. 270 supra. 

ἐπιτάφιος. 266. A funeral oration (sc. λόγος). Lat. funebris 
oratio. 


ἐπιτραγῳδεῖν. 122. 70 declaim in tragic tones, to rant. Lat. 
tragico more rem amplificare. It is to be noted that this verb (not a 
common one) occurs in Theophr. Ast. Plant. ix. 8, 5: possibly it 
was also used in his περὶ λέξεως. It is found in Dionys. Hal. de 
Thucyd. c. 28. 


ἐπιφέρειν. 34, 85, 106, 122, etc. 70. add, to subjoin. Lat. 
adiungere. Cp. ἐπιφορὰ in ὃ 196. In ὃ 122 the meaning is the 
late one of ‘adduce’ or ‘cite’ (Lat. /audare): cp. Dionys. Halic. de 
Comp. Verb. c. 4 καλῶς ἂν ἔχοι τὰ Εὐριπίδεια ταῦτα ἐπενεγκεῖν. (P 
gives ἐποιήσαμεν in ὃ 122; but Hemsterhuis’ conjecture ἐποίσομεν 
has been adopted in the text.) 

ἐπιφώνημα. 106, 109, 110 (bis), 111 (bis). Concluding exclama- 
tion, finishing touch, Venvoy. Lat. epiphonema. Quintil. vill. 5, ΤΙ 
“et addita in clausula est epiphonematis modo non tam probatio 
quam extrema quasi insultatio. est enim epiphonema rei narratae 
vel probatae summa acclamatio: Zantae molis erat Romanam condere 
gentem !” Hermogenes (Spengel Aes. Gr. i, pp. 252—254) has a 
section περὶ ἐπιφωνήματος. Cp. ἐπιφωνεῖν δὲ 107, I10, and ἐπιφωνη- 
ματικῶς § 109. 

ἐπίχαρις. 147. Graceful, charming. Lat. venustus, amoenus. 
Cp. ἐπιχαρίτως in §§ 127, 140, and ἐπιχαριτώτερα ἃ 133. 


282 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


ἔπος. 37,62. Verse, line. Lat. versus. Used with special re- 
ference to ‘ Epic’ poetry. 

ἑρμηνεία. 1, 12 (bis), 18, 14, passim. Lxpression, style. Lat. 
elocutio. Fr. élocution. Ital. elocuzione. The meaning of ἑρμηνεία, 
as a rhetorical term, is discussed in the Classical Review, xv. 252 ff. 
The περὶ ἑρμηνείας, as its title and contents show, treats of style 
(prose style in particular), and is an essay on literary expression or 
composition with special reference to the four types of style. ‘ Con- 
cerning Style’ is the most convenient modern rendering, though the 
word ‘style’ suggests the pen in hand, whereas ἑρμηνεία, λέξις and 
φράσις suggest rhetorical expression, the spoken word of the orator. 
The Latin e/ocwtio likewise connotes delivery, and is clearly a better 
rendering than zzterpretatio; the definition of edocutio given by the 
Auctor. ad Herennium i. 2, 3 (‘“ elocutio est idoneorum verborum et 
sententiarum ad inventionem accommodatio”) might stand for a 
definition of ἑρμηνεία itself. On the use of λέξις, φράσις, and ἑρμηνεία 
there are some good remarks in G. Thiele’s Hermagoras, pp. 140— 
143. Among other things, he points out that in certain phrases λέξις, 
as the original term, always held its ground; we never find σχήματα 
ἑρμηνείας, for example, But a comparison of § 136 with ὃ 156 shows 
the substantial identity of λέξις and ἑρμηνεία in the 7. ἑρμ. 


ἑρμηνεύειν. 46, 120, 121 (bis). Zo express, to phrase. Lat. expo- 
nere. Cp. Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 3 mpaypatia λιτὰ καὶ 
βιωτικα, ἡρμηνευμένα ὑπέρευ, and de adm. wi dic. in Demosth. c. 26 
ὃ δαιμόνιος ἑρμηνεῦσαι Πλάτων. It is one of the advantages of 
ἑρμηνεία as a term for style that a corresponding verb exists side 
by side with it. The English verb ‘to phrase’ is as old as Azng 
Henry VITT. (Act I. Se. 1. 1. 34); in French, ‘phraser’ is (to judge 
from Hatzfeld and Darmesteter’s dictionary) comparatively recent. 

evavdyvworos. 193. Lasy to read, readable. Lat. lectu factlis. 
Cp. Arist. Rhez. iii. 5, 6 ὅλως δὲ δεῖ εὐανάγνωστον εἶναι TO γεγραμμένον 
Kal εὐφραστον᾽ ἔστι δὲ TO αὐτό. 

εὐήκοος. 48, 258, 301. Pleasant to the ear. Lat. auditu tucundus. 
As stated in the Introduction, p. 56, the word is late; but it should 
have been there added that it is late in this sense only. In other 
senses it is found as early as Hippocrates and Aristotle. 

εὐημερεν. 298. 70 have a good time, to flourish. Lat. secunda 
fortuna uti. This verb, together with the corresponding noun and adj., 
is classical ; here it is used of the success of the Socratic dialogues. 


GLOSSARY 283 


evdeta. 198. Nominative case: sub. πτῶσις. Lat. casus rectus. 
Cp. ὃ 104. In ὃ 292 ἐξ εὐθείας = recta via. 

εὐκαταστρόφως.ς 10. With a happy turn. Lat. callide. The word 
is am. εἰρ. 

εὐκαταφρόνητος. 4, 77, 207. Contemptible. Lat. abtectus, humilts. 
Cp. π. ty. ili. 1 ἐκ τοῦ φοβεροῦ κατ᾽ ὀλίγον ὑπονοστεῖ πρὸς τὸ εὐκατα- 
φρόνητον, and Dionys. Halic. de Comp. Verb. c. 2 εὐκαταφρόνητα καὶ 
ταπεινὰ λαβόντες ὀνόματα. 

εὐμίμητος. 286. Easily copied. Lat. tmitabilis. ‘The word is 
used by Plato (Rep. x. 605 a). The π᾿ ἑρμ. is rather fond of 
compounds in ¢i-, e.g. εὐμεγέθης (‘good-sized’) in § 76, which, like 
εὐμίμητος, 15 a classical word. 

εὐπαγής. 176 (bis).  Wellproportioned, well-compounded. Lat. 
compactus, coagmentatus. Used of a word which is composed of 
vowels and consonants in fairly equal proportions and so escapes 
the two extremes denoted by the adjectives λεῖος and τραχύς. 

εὐπρέπεια. 287, 288. Seenliness, good taste. Lat. studium decort. 
So εὐπρεπώς § 288. 

εὔρυθμος. 42,117. Rhythmical. Lat. numerosus, moderatus (Cic. 
de Orat. ill. 48, 184; 11. 8, 34). The word is used by Aristotle 
(Δ τέ. iii. ὃ, 7). P, however, gives ἔνρυθμος or ἔρρυθμος in S$ 42, 
117, 301; for the distinction between εὐρυθμος and ἔρρυθμος, cp. 
Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 11 ad fin. 

εὐσταλής. 14. Well-eguipped, trim. Lat. decenter ornatus, suc- 
cinctus. 

εὐτελής. 43, 54, etc. Cheap, mean, paltry. Lat. humilis. Cp. 
LD. lek, 78. WOZe 

εὐτραπελία. 177. Wit. Lat. urbanitas. So εὐτράπελος, ὃ 172. 
Cp. Aristot. δ θΖ. 11. 12, 16 καὶ φιλογέλωτες, διὸ καὶ εὐτράπελοι᾽ ἡ γὰρ 
εὐτραπελία πεπαιδευμένη ὕβρις ἐστίν. 

εὐφημισμός. 281. Huphemism. Lat. vocabulum boni ominis adhi- 
bere. ‘This tendency of speech is well described in the same section 
by the words: 6 τὰ δύσφημα εὔφημα ποιῶν καὶ τὰ ἀσεβήματα εὐσεβή- 
ματα. So Eustathius on Odyss. 1. 121 ἔστι τὸ σχῆμα εὐφημισμός, 
ἀγαθῇ κλήσει περιστέλλων τὸ φαῦλον, ὥσπερ καὶ τὰς ᾿Ερινῦς Εὐμενίδας 
διὰ τὸ εὔφημον κατωνόμαζον καίτοι δυσμενεῖς οὔσας. 

εὐφωνία. 68, 69, 71,175. LEuphony, musical sound. Lat. vocis 
dulcedo s. suavitas. So εὔφωνος, S§ 70, 255 (cp. Cic. Or. 24, 80 


284 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


“simplex probatur in propriis usitatisque verbis, quod aut opftime sonat 
aut rem maxime explanat”’). In this sense, εὐφωνία is a late word, 
occurring in Dionys. Halic., ete. Cp. Quintil. i. 5, 4 “sola est, quae 
notari possit velut vocalifas, quae εὐφωνία dicitur ; culus in 60 delectus 
est, ut inter duo, quae idem significant ac tantundem valent, quod 
melius sonet, malis.” On euphony in general, cp. Rehdantz-Blass 
Indices, pp. 18, 3, 4, 5; and Earle’s Ezglish Prose, pp. 309 ff.—In 
δ 175, P has εὐφημία, which may sometimes have been used in the 
same sense as εὐφωνία : cp. Steph. s. v. 


εὔχαρις. 157, 160, 163, 164, 173. Graceful, charming. Lat. 
lepidus, venustus. In ὃ 168, εὐχάριστος is used to describe a man of 
wit, taste, and breeding. 


ἐφέλκειν. 126,175. Zo bring in train. Lat. attrahere. In ὃ 175, 
the verb is used with reference to the addition of a final v: cp. the 
expression vd ἐφελκυστικόν. 


ἴωτικός. 81. Lull of life. Lat. vitalis. ζωτικαῖς ἐνεργείαις = 
vitalibus actionibus. 


ἡδονή. 78, 180, 181, 182. Charm. Lat. cucunditas, voluptas. 
Fr. charme, agrément, attrait. Cp. ἡδύς, S§ 15, 166, 173, 174; and 
D. H. p. 193. The adj. ἡδὺς is used of style in Aristot. fez. il. 12, 
6 (quoted on p. 39 supra); but the noun in this application seems 
not to be earlier than Philodemus and Dionysius. 


ἦθος. 28 (bis), 171 (bis), 227, 245, 264, 293. Lat. mos, indoles. 
See further in 7. ὕψ. p. 200, D. H. p. 193. ἠθικὸς (‘moratus’) occurs 
in ὃ 227; ἡθικῶς (‘in a way true to character,’ ‘ naturally’) in §§ 216, 
297. Cp. Volkmann Rhetorik®, pp. 273 ff., Causeret Etude sur la 
langue de la Rhitorique et de la critique littéeratre dans Cicéron, Ὁ. 98; 
Sandys Orator of Cicero, pp. 80, 131. 

ἡμίμετρον. 1. Hemistich, half-line. Lat. metrum dimidiatum. 
ἡμιστίχιον is used elsewhere in the same sense. Cp. § 180. 

jpaos. 5, 42. Heroic. Lat. herous. The word is especially 
applied to the hexameter line, and to spondaic feet, though it is 
elsewhere used of dactyls also as forming part of a hexameter, and 
sometimes of anapaests. Cf. Plat. Ref. 111. 4ooB; Aristot. AAez. ii. 
8, 4 (with Cope’s notes); Cic. Ov. 57, 192; Quintil. ix. 4, 88.—In 
§ 204 npwikds is found. 

ἦχος. 71, 73, 82,185. Sound. Lat. sonus. In ὃ 73 ἦχος seems to 
mean ‘breathing,’ ‘spiritus’; though the usual term for this is πνεῦμα. 


GLOSSARY ' 238 


In §§ 42, 68, 174, 299 ἠχώδης (a late word) occurs, with the meaning 
‘noisy,’ ‘sonorous,’ ‘resonant’: Lat. clamoszus, sonorus. 

θαυμασμός. 291. Lulogy. Lat. admiratio. The word is late— 
Philodemus, Plutarch, Hermogenes, etc. It is curious that a word of 
analogous formation, ἐξετασμὸς (for ἐξέτασις) occurs in Demosth. de 
Cor. § 16 and nowhere else in classical literature, not being found 
again till the time of Plutarch.—In ὃ 165, θαῦμα -- θαυμαστὸν 1.6. 
ineptum: Cp. π. ὕψ. ἵν. 2 θαυμαστή ye τοῦ Μακεδόνος ἡ πρὸς τὸν σοφισ- 
τὴν σύγκρισις. 

θέσις. 68, 145.(Ὀ. Use, application. Lat. positio, usis. 

θεώρημα. 195. Observation. Lat. animadversio. Cp. θεωρία, 


Gs OWE Ih 5 SOSA. Te 

θραύειν. 301. 70. shatter. Lat. infringere. Used with reference 
to the scazon, or choliambus, into which Hipponax converted the 
iambic senarius. 


lapBos. 43. An zambus. Lat. zambus. In the same section 
μέτρα ἰαμβικὰ =tambic lines. 

ἰδιωτικός. 15, 144, 207, 208. Wor tx accordance with the rules of 
art. Lat. vulgarzs. ‘Vhe general sense of unprofessional shades off 
into the apparently opposite meanings ; (1) wntutored, ordinary, com- 
monplace ; (2) wregular, unique. 

ἱλαρός. 128, 132, 134. Genial, pleasant. Lat. hilaris, amoenus. 
Cp. Sandys Ovator of Cicero, p. 115: ‘‘hilariora, ‘more genial’ (the 
opposite of grvaviora), and corresponding to the swavitas of the genus 
medium whose object is delectare and conciliare. De Or. 11. 236 
‘ipsa hilaritas benevolentiam conciliat.’” So ttapotpaywdia = tragico- 
comoedia (Plautus), tragédie-bouffe. Cp. D. H. p. 193. 


ἰσόκωλος. 25. Consisting of equal members. Lat. compar (Auct. 
ad Her. iv. 20: ep. Cic. Or. ὃ 38); exaeguatus membris (Aquila 
Rom., Halm p. 30). The meaning is illustrated (§ 25) by a sentence 
of Thucydides, in the second part of which τ᾽ (rather than re) should 
perhaps be read in order to obtain an exact equality of syllables. 


ἱστορικός. 19. Historical. Lat. historicus. One of the τρία γένη 
mep.odwyv—that appropriate to narrative—is thus described. 

ἰσχνός. 36, 183, 190, 203, 226, 235, 236. Spare, plain, simple, 
unadorned: χαρακτὴρ ἰσχνὸς being one of the four types of style. 
Lat. tenuis (Cic. de Orat. 111. 52, 199), subtilis (Quintil. xii. το, 58). 


286 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Fr. s¢mple. The metaphor in ἰσχνός, as in ddpos (which is sometimes 
used as its opposite), was probably that of bodily condition. For the 
deceptive ease of the χαρακτὴρ ἰσχνός, cp. Cic. Or. xxiii. 76 “nam 
orationis subtilitas imitabilis illa quidem videtur esse existimanti, sed 
nihil est experienti minus,” and the passage of Steele’s Guardian 
quoted in Sandys’ edition ad Zoc. ‘The de Lysta of Dionysius should 
be compared with the chapter on the xap. ἰσχνὸς in the z. épu. The 
corresponding noun ἰσχνότης occurs in S§ 14, 223.—ddedys and 
ἀφέλεια are not found in the z. €pu. (cp. p. 268 supra); nor again 
are such familiar rhetorical terms as ὕψος, ὑψηλός, καθαρός, ἀνθηρός, 
αὐστηρός, adpos, μειρακιώδης, μέσος (‘intermediate’ style), πολιτικός, 
ἰδέα, γοργότης. Similarly, although κατορθοῦν and κατόρθωμα occur 
in the treatise (§§ 122, 123), they do not bear the specifically 
rhetorical sense [for which see 7. vp. p. 202 and D. H. p. 194]. 
In fact, the Peripatetic 7. ἑρμ.. seems to stand far apart from 
Dionysius (with his Isocratic traditions) and from Hermogenes. 


κακοζηλία. 189, 239. Affectation, conceit, mannerism, preciosity - 
‘fond affection, Puttenham. Lat. cacozelia, mala affectatio (Quintil. 
vill. 3, 56). Fr. affectation. The adj. κακόζηλος is found in S§ 186, 
239. Dionysius does not, I think, use κακόζηλος or κακοζηλία ; on 
the other hand, the z. ἑρμ. does not use μειρακιώδης. But τὸ κακό- 
ζηλον is found in the z. vy. ul. 4 (see p. 201 Ζ2024., and cp. Hermog. 
in Spengel Ret. Gr. ii. 256—258). ψυχρὸς occurs in Dionys. Hal., 
π. ὕψ., and π. épu., which last formulates in ὃ 186 the distinction 
between ψυχρὸς and κακόζηλος. Volkmann (/he¢. p. 541) describes 
τὸ κακόζηλον as ‘‘das manirirte, schwulstige und alberne.” Wila- 
mowitz-Moellendorff gives an account of the word in Afevmes xxxy. 
p- 28. 


kaxotexvia. 27, 247. Artifice. Lat. nimium atque intempestivum 
artis et concinnitatis studium. Germ. Kiinstelet. So κακοτεχνεῖν in 
§§ 28, 250. 

κακοφωνία. 219 (bis), 255. Harshness of sound. Lat. asperitas 
sont. Fr. dureté, apreté (des sons). τὸ κακόστομον is used with the 
same meaning in z. ὕψ. xliil. 1, while Dionysius uses both εὔστομος 
and εὔφωνος (though with a different shade of meaning). κακοφωνία 
is a late word,—-Strabo, Galen, etc.—The illustration in ὃ 255 is of 
special interest, since attention seems to be called to the scansion 
of ὄφιν (and possibly also to the neglect of the digamma in the 
reconstructed line).—Milton has a good example of designed caco- 


GLOSSARY ° 287 


phony in Paradise Lost, Book 11. : ‘On a sudden open fly, | With 
impetuous recoil and jarring sound, | The infernal doors, and on 


their hinges grate | Harsh thunder, that the lowest bottom shook | Of 
Erebus.” 


καλλιεπής. 166. Choice in diction. Lat. swaviloguens. It is the 
word used of Agathon in Aristoph. Zhesm. 49. Cp. D. “7. p. 193, 
with the passages there quoted. 

κάλλος. 106, 166, 173, 232, 252, 274. Beauty (of language). 
Lat. pulchritudo. Cp. Aristot. “het. ul. 2, 13.—The verb καλλω- 
πίζειν occurs in ὃ 165, and the adj. καλὸς in δὲ 166, 173, etc. 

καμπή. 10,17 (bis). end, rounding. Lat. flexio, rotunditas. 

κανών. 87,91. Rule, standard. Lat. norma, regula. 


κατακερματίζειν. 76. Zo cut up, to fritter away. Lat. concidere 
Cp. exx. quoted in π. vy. p. 201. κερματίζειν and κατακόπτειν are 
found in ὃ 4, where the meaning is (as Ernesti gives it) ‘‘oratio 
concisa, membris minutis et veluti frustulatim adspersis constans.” 

katakopys. 303. Satiating, wearisome. Lat. satietatis plenus. 
A favourite word with writers on rhetoric: e.g. Aristot. AHe?. ul. 3, 3, 
Dionys. Halic. de adm. vi dic. in Dem. c. 45, 7. dW. Xxil. 3. 


καταληκτικός. 38, 39. Final. Lat. terminalis. ‘This late word 
is elsewhere used, by writers on metre, of a verse which has its last 
foot incomplete. Here it must have the same sense as ληκτικὸς or 
τελικός, viz. ‘forming the conclusion.’ So καταλήγειν in S$ 4, 154, 
and κατάληξις (‘termination’) in ὃ το. 

κατασμικρύνειν. 44,123. Zo diminish, to belittle. Lat. conterere. 
Late, —LXX., M. Aurel. Ant., Lucian, Athenaeus, etc. 

κατεστραμμένος. 12, 21. Compacted, close-knit. Lat. contortus, 
vinctus. Fr. ramassé, arrondt. The distinction between the λέξις 
κατεστραμμένη and the λέξις εἰρομένη is explained in Anistot. /hev. 11. 
9. The former denotes a periodic style (the οἷον in 7. ἑρμ. ὃ 12 
being virtually = ‘to wit’), the latter a loose or running style. 

kekAacpévos. 189. Lroken, effeminate. Lat. fractus, mollis. Cp. 
π. vw. xl. I ῥυθμὸς κεκλασμένος λόγων καὶ σεσοβημένος. 


κινδυνώδης. 80 (bis), 85 (bis), 127. Hazardous, risky. Lat. peri- 
culosus. Cp. the use of ‘periclitantia’ in Quintil. xi. 1, 32: “in 
luvenibus etiam uberiora paulo et paene periclitantia feruntur.” The 
word is, for the most part, late—Polybius, Cicero, Galen (after 
Hippocr.), etc. ἐπικίνδυνος is more usual in earlier writers, or παρα-͵ 


288 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


κεκινδυνευμένος (Aristoph., Dionys. Hal.). κινδυνώδης and ἐπισφαλὴς 
have counterparts in ἀκίνδυνος and ἀσφαλής, both of which occur in 


the treatise.—In § 40 κινδυνεύειν occurs in its specifically Attic sense. 


κλαυσίγελως. 28. Sorry laughter. Vat. fletus cum risu. Fr. un 
rire méelé de larmes. E. Muller (Zheorie der Kunst bei den Alten, 
ll. 241) translates κλαυσιγέλωτα by “‘das weinerliche Lacheln,” and 
speaks of it as “eine Mischung von Lachen und Weinen, die aber 
freilich yon Homers δακρυόεν γελᾶν himmelweit entfernt ist.” Cp. 
Xen. Hellen. vil. 2, 9 πάντας δὲ τοὺς παρόντας τότε ye τῷ ὄντι κλαυσί. 
γέλως εἶχεν, and Pollux Oxomast. 11. 64. The reference later in this 
section to ‘fun at a funeral’ helps to fix the meaning of κλαυσί 
γελως. 


κλέπτειν. 118, 182, 239 (bis). Zo disguise, to hide. Lat. occul- 
tare. Cp. Aristot. Aer. ii. 2, 5, Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 19, 
de adm. vi dic. in Dem. c. 2. 

κλῖμαξ. 270. Ladder, climax: (‘marching, or climbing, figure,’ 
Puttenham). Lat. gvadatio (Cic. de Orat. 111. 54; Quintil. ix. 3, 
54). Fr. gradation. Well illustrated, in the same section, from 
Demosth. de Coy. 179: an illustration which brings out the elaboration 
with which the ancient ‘climax’ was usually constructed. Rehdantz- 
Blass refer to: Joe i. 4, Epistle to the Romans x. 13, Shakespeare’s 
As Vou Like Itv. 2. Cp. p. 255 supra. 

κοινός. 157, 164, 186, 232. Ovdinary, current. Lat. communis. 
(Cos JD, EL, ΡΡ. 194; 195. 

κόμμα. 9, 10, 205, 238, 241. Short clause, phrase. Lat. incisum 
(Cic. Or. 62, 211; Quintil. ix, 4, 122). Fr. zmczse. With the defini- 
tion given in § 9, cp. Spengel Rhet. Gr. 111. 28 κόμμα δ᾽ ἐστὶ τὸ 
περιόδου καὶ κώλου ἔλαττον, and Walz Rhet. Gr. vil. 25 κόμμα φράσις 
βραχύ τι νόημα ἔχουσα. (Perhaps the English ‘phrase’ will serve as 
an approximate rendering. Cp. Earle Grammar of English Now in 
Use, p. 6: “ For not only single words, but also groups of words are 
capable of being parts of speech; and when they are so, we call 
them phrases. And such phrases may sometimes be broken by the 
insertion of other parts of speech, e.g. ‘will very commonly be 
found,’ where zwz// be found is a phrase.”) 

κομψείαᾳ. 36. Darntiness. Lat. elegantia. The word occurs in 
Plato Phaedr. 101 Cc, and may be regarded as specifically Attic. Cp. 
D. H.p. 195 5. v. κομψός, and see the passage of M. Aurel. Ant. m1. 5 
quoted on p. 19, n. 1 supra. 


GLOSSARY 289 


κόσμος. 106, 109, 164, 165. Adornment. Lat. ornatus, orna- 
mentum. 


κρεμνᾶν. 216. Zo keep in suspense. Lat. suspensum tenere. Used 
with reference to the art of Ctesias. 


κυκλικός. 80. Circular. Lat. rotundus (Cic. Brut. 78, 272). 
Cp. κυκλοειδής, ὃ 11 (together with n. on p. 214); and κύκλος in 
§§ 30, 31 (cp. Cic. Or. 62, 207 “ut tamquam in orbe inclusa currat 
oratio ”). 


κυνικός, 170, 259, 271. Belonging to the Cynics. Lat. Cynicus. 
Κυνικὸς τρόπος -- “methodus iocandi Cynica, quae acerbas morda- 
cesque facetias habet”’ (Ernesti). 


κύριος. 77, 82 (ter), 86, 87 (bis), 190, 192. Accredited, regular, 
current. Lat. proprius. Fr. propre. In S§ 82, 86, 87 the meaning 
is ‘literal,’ as distinguished from metaphorical. Cp. D. & p. 195, 
π. vw. p. 202 (S. V. κυριολογία). 

κῶλον. 1, 2, 3, 10, 12 (bis), 18, 22, 34, et passim. Member. 
Lat. membrum. Fr. membre de phrase. A subdivision of the period: 
defined in ὃ 34. Hermogenes (Speng. ef. Gr. 11. 241) describes 
the κῶλον as a ‘completed sense’ (ἀπηρτισμένη διάνοια). Quintilian, 
ix. 4, 122 ff., distinguishes carefully between the cmciswm (κόμμα), 
membrum (κῶλον), and circuitus (περίοδος). In π. épu. ὃ 2 the writer 
is at pains to state that he means to use κῶλον of a logical division, 
and not of a mere pause for breath. See also Sandys Ov. p. 222. 


κωμῳδία. 169, 204, 259, 286. Comedy. Lat. comoedia. In ὃ 204 
the allusion to 7 κωμῳδία ἡ νέα seems indicative of late date. The 
adj. κωμικὸς occurs in § 128, and κωμῳδικὸς in §§ 143, 159. For 
κωμῳδεῖν (S$ 150, 177) and κομῳδοποιὸς (δ 126), see notes on pp. 238, 
234 supra. 


κωφός. 68. Dumb. Lat. mutus. By σύνθεσις κωφὴ ἀτεχνώς is meant 
“prorsus muta oratio, 1.6. quae nullos numeros habet” (Goeller) : 
cp. ἀμουσοτέρα in the same context. 


λαμβάνειν. 43, 49, 57, 83, et passim. Zo employ. Lat. adhibere. 


λεῖος. 48, 68, 176 (bis), 178. Smooth. Lat. levis. In § 48 τὸ 
λεῖον καὶ ὁμαλὲς τῆς συνθέσεως = levis et aeguabilis compositio. So 
λειότης in δὲ 48, 258, 299, 300. Compare λειότης ὀνομάτων in Diony- 
sius (de 77,17. ii. 2) with /evitas verborum in Quintilian (Lust. Or. x. 
I, 52), the reference in both cases being to Hesiod. 


R. 19 


290 DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


λέξις. 21, 22, 38, et passim. Szple. Lat. elocutio. Sometimes 
(δὲ 88, 145, 184) found in the plural for ‘expressions,’ Zocu/iones ; some- 
times also (§ 142), when used in the singular, it refers specially to 
diction, or choice of words. See s. v. ἑρμηνεία, p. 282 supra, for 
various references. 


λιτός. 77. Simple, unpretending. Lat. simplex. A conjecture 
of Spengel’s: rendered improbable perhaps by two facts, (1) the 
form Aeros is found in inscriptions, but occurs rarely or never in 
written documents ; (2) the 7. ἑρμ. elsewhere avoids λιτὸς in the 
same way as it avoids ἀφελὴς (for which last cp. p. 268 supra). 


λογικός. 1, 41, 42 (bis), 117. Swzted to prose. Lat. aptus orationi 
solutae. ‘The word is late in this sense,—Dionys. Hal., Diog. Laert., 
etc. πεζὸς is found with the same meaning in ὃ 90; and λεκτικὸς is 
similarly used by Aristotle. In ὃ 41 λογικός, as distinguished from 
μεγαλοπρεπής, 1s almost = ‘colloquial’: cp. λεκτικῆς ἁρμονίας =‘ col- 
loquial intonation’ (Aristot. Poet. 4, το ; “her. in. 8, 4). 


λόγιος. 38. LHloguent. Lat. facundus. With the words of the 
π. ἑρμ. (apEopor δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ μεγαλοπρεποῦς, ὅνπερ νῦν λόγιον ὀνομά- 
ζουσιν) should be compared the statement of Phrynichus (p. 198 
Lob.) that λόγιος was a popular expression applied to a good speaker 
of the elevated type (λόγιος: ws οἱ πολλοὶ λέγουσιν ἐπὶ τοῦ δεινοῦ 
εἰπεῖν καὶ ὑψηλοῦ οὐ τιθέασιν οἱ ἀρχαῖοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ TOD τὰ ἐν ἑκάστῳ ἔθνει 
ἐπιχώρια ἐξηγουμένου ἐμπείρως, 1.6. a learned chronicler of national 
history). As bearing on the date of the treatise, it is noteworthy 
that Phrynichus, who belonged to the age of the Antonines, men- 
tions the identification of λόγιος with ὑψηλός (1.6. μεγαλοπρεπής). 
This identification 15 perhaps foreshadowed by a somewhat earlier 
author, Plutarch, who uses the corresponding noun λογιότης in de 
Glor. Athen. c. 5, ἡ Bipiridov σοφία καὶ ἡ Sopoxdéovs λογιότης Kai τὸ 
Αἰσχύλου στόμα, where the qualities attributed to the three tragedians 
respectively seem to be subtlety, elevation, and full-mouthed utter- 
ance. Strabo, a still earlier writer, has (Geogr. xiii. 2) ἅπαντας μὲν 
yap λογίους ἐποίησε τοὺς μαθητὰς ᾿Αριστοτέλης, λογιώτατον δὲ Θεό- 
φραστον. Plutarch (Cc. c. 49) reports a saying of Augustus with 
reference to Cicero: λόγιος ἁνήρ, ὦ παῖ, λόγιος καὶ φιλόπατρις. 


λόγος. 4, 32, 87, 41, et passim. Daescourse. Lat. oratio. Often 
in the plural, with perhaps a special reference to ‘speeches.’ In 
§ 92 λόγος, as opposed to ὄνομα, means the definition, or description, 
of a term as distinguished from the term itself: cp. Aristot. R/ev. iil. 


GLOSSARY 291 


6, τ. In ὃ 78 (διθύραμβον ἀντὶ λόγου) λόγος =‘ prose’: cp. Aristot. 
Rhet. iil. 2, 7 (καὶ ἐν ποιήσει καὶ ἐν λόγοις). See further in 7. vy. 
p- 203, D. H. p. τοῦ: 


λύσις. 63, 70, 192 (bis), 193, 194 (bis). Separation. Lat. disso- 
Zutio. he word is especially applied to asyndeton (‘loose language,’ 
Puttenham), or absence of connecting particles: cp. Aristot. R/et. 
iil. 12, 4. See Abbott and Matheson’s edition, Pt. 1. p. xxxi. and 
Pt il. p. 121, for instances of asyndeton in Demosth. de Cor. The 
figure tends not only to force but sometimes to obscurity, as in 
Demosth. de Cor. 94 (δόξαν εὔνοιαν, if that be the right reading) 
and in the poetry of Robert Browning.—The term λύσις is also 
used of hiatus (§ 70). The corresponding verb λύειν will be found 
in §§$ 92, 193, 194, 229, 247. 

μακρηγορεῖν. 222, 242. 70 be prolix. Lat. prolixe dicere. So 
μακρολογία and μακρολόγος in § 7. 

μακρός. 38, 41, 72, etc. Long. Lat. longus. In ὃ 86 μακρὸν 
ῥήτορα =a ‘long’ speaker. In ὃ 4o the noun μακρότης is used. 


μάχη. 80. Opposition. Lat. pugna. The following passages 
will illustrate the meaning: Aristot. (het. il. 22 ἔστι δὲ τὸ μὲν 
δεικτικὸν ἐνθύμημα τὸ ἐξ ὁμολογουμένων συνάγειν, TO δὲ ἐλεγκτικὸν τὰ 
ἀνομολογούμενα συνάγειν: Apsines (Speng. Rhet. Gr. 1. 376) πᾶν 
ἐνθύμημα yivetar...7) ἐξ ἀκολούθου συλλογιστικῶς ἢ ἐκ μάχης : Epict. 
Enchir. 52 τί γάρ ἐστιν ἀπόδειξις ; τί ἀκολουθία ; τί μάχη; τί ἀληθές; 
τί ψεῦδος; Cic. 702. 14, 56 “4114 ex repugnantibus sententiis 
communis conclusio, quae...a rhetoribus ἐνθύμημα nuncupatur”: 
Quintil. Zast. Or. v. το, 1, 2 “nam enthymema (quod nos com- 
mentum sane aut commentationem wmterpretemur, quia aliter non pos- 
sumus, Graeco melius usuri) unum intellectum habet, quo omnia mente 
concepta significat (sed nunc non de eo loquimur), alterum, quo 
sententiam cum ratione, tertium, quo certam quandam argumenti 
conclusionem vel ex consequentibus vel ex repugnantibus: quam- 
quam de hoc parum convenit. sunt enim, qui illud prius epichivema 
dicant, pluresque invenias in ea opinione, ut id demum, quod pugna 
constat, enthymema accipi velint, et ideo illud Cornificius contrarium 
appellat. Hunc alii rheforicum syllogismum, alu imperfectum syllogis- 
mum vocaverunt, quia nec distinctis nec totidem partibus conclude- 
retur: quod sane non utique ab oratore desideratur.” Possibly the 
original expression was ἐνθύμημα ἐκ μαχομένων (“a reasoning from 
contraries or contradictories,” Hamilton; e.g. ‘““hunc metuere? alte- 


19—2 


292 DEMETRIOS ON “ST VLE 


rum in metu non ponere?” Cic. Zop. 13, 55); and this was abbre- 
viated into ἐνθύμημα ἐκ μάχης. μάχη is a late word, in this sense. 
Cp. Cope’s Lntroduction to Aristotle’s Rhetoric, pp. 99 ff. 


μεγαλεῖος. 14, 39, 56, etc. Lmpressive, stately. Lat. amplus, 
magnificus. For μεγαλεῖόν τι in ὃ 56 Gregorius has μεγαλειότητα. 


μεγαληγορίαᾳ. 29. Lofty utterance. Lat. ampla dictio. Cp. π. ὕψ. 
XV. I, XVI. I, VUl. 4 (μεγαλήγορος). 

μεγαλοπρεπής. 18, 36, 37, 39, et passim. Grand, elevated. Lat. 
magnificus. Fr. magnifique. Elevated is the most generally conve- 
nient rendering for μεγαλοπρεπής, especially as it has a corresponding 
noun and verb. But grand, stately, lofty, impressive, dignified will 
also sometimes serve. Aristotle discusses the application of the 
term to style in ΜΔ. 11]. 12, 6 (quoted in Introduction, p. 39 supra). 
The noun μεγαλοπρέπεια occurs in 7. ἑρμ. S§ 37, 45, 48, et passim. 
μεγαλοπρέπεια and μεγαλοπρεπὴς are often used side by side with 
ὕψος and ὑψηλὸς (neither of which words are found in this treatise) : 
e. g. Dionys. Hal. de Thucyd. c. 23 ὕψος λέγω καὶ καλλιρημοσύνην καὶ 
σεμνολογίαν καὶ μεγαλοπρέπειαν, Ep. ad Pomp. c. 2 τῆς ὑψηλῆς καὶ 
μεγαλοπρεποῦς καὶ παρακεκινδυνευμένης φράσεως ἐφιέμενον Πλάτωνα, 
de Lys. c. 13 ὑψηλὴ δὲ καὶ μεγαλοπρεπὴς οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ Λυσίου λέξις. 
Coloured may sometimes serve as a rendering οἵ μεγαλοπρεπής (cp. 
John Knox, “God knows I did use no rhetoric nor coloured speech,” 
as quoted in R. L. Stevenson’s Alen and Books, p. 378); or better 
still, hezghtened (cp. Raleigh’s AZ/fon, p. 235 “both names, ‘Italy’ 
and ‘Vulcan,’ are heightened and improved :—‘In Ausonian land | 
Men called him Mulciber’”). Milton is, of course, an excellent 
example of the χαρακτὴρ μεγαλοπρεπὴς in English verse, and Gibbon 
in English prose.—The passage quoted from the De Vulgari Elo- 
quentia in Norden’s Kunstprosa 1]. 753 exhibits clearly the attitude of 
Dante towards the ‘‘gradus constructionis excellentissimus” and the 
“‘vocabula nobilissima.” 

μεγαλοφροσύνης 298. Greatness of soul, elevation of thought. Lat. 
animi sublimitas. Cp. π. vy. p. 203. It is the word used in the 
well-known phrase of the z. vy. ix. 2, ὕψος μεγαλοφροσύνης ἀπήχημα. 

μέγεθος. 5 (bis), 36, 44, et passim. Grandeur, elevation. Lat. 
magnitudo, sublimitas. Fr. ampleur. The word is often found in the 
π. vy., Which also has the verb μεγεθοποιεῖν, of similar meaning to 
ὑψοῦν and the opposite of μικροποιεῖν. Cp. μέγας in ὃ 278; μεγάλως in 
§§ 75, 120; μεῖζον in §§ 92, 103; μέγιστον in ὃ 4o. The meaning in 


GLOSSARY 293 


the last clause of § 40 seems to be that, while Thucydides is always 
stately, it is his σύνθεσις which produces his greatest stateliness. 

μεθαρμόζεσθαι. 184. 70 change the structure, or harmony, of a 
sentence. Lat. structuram mutare. The uncompounded verb appo- 
few is used in the same section. 

μέλος 71. Music, melody. Lat. cantus. For μέλισμα in § 74, 
see ἢ. On p. 225 supra. 

μεταβολή. 148. Withdrawal, self-correction, recantation. Lat. 
consilti mutatio. Cp. μεταβάλλομαι in S§ 148, 149.—For the meaning 
‘variety of style,’ see ἢ. H. p. τού, 7. ὕψ. p. 203. 

μετάθεσις. 112. Transference. Lat. transpositio. 


μεταρρυθμίζειν. 297. 700 change the form, to remodel. Lat. refor- 
mare. Other interesting compounds with pera, denoting change, are 
μεταλαμβάνειν ὃ 80, μετανοεῖν ὃ 148, μεταποιεῖν ὃ 281. 

μετασυντιθέναι. 11, 59, 185, 249. 70 change the arrangement (of 
a sentence). Lat. mztato ordine componere. A ar. <ip., in the sense 
that it does not occur elsewhere than in the π. épy. 


μεταφορά. 78, 80 (ter), 81, et passim. Zvansference, metaphor : 
‘the figure of transport,’ Puttenham. Lat. ¢rans/atio. See references 
on p. 226. The corresponding verb μεταφέρειν in §§ 78, 84, 86, 387, 
EQO, 272. 

μέτρον. 1, 35, 42, et passim. Measure, metre. Lat. metrum. In 
$4 καταλήγοντος τοῦ μέτρου may be translated ‘when the line (μέτρον -- 
στίχος) terminates.’ The adj. μετρικὸς is found in ὃ 182, and μετροειδὴς 
(a az. eip.) in S$ 181, 182: for which two sections Ernesti’s Lex. 
Techn. Graec. Rhet. p. 141 (5. v. εὐμελὴς) should be consulted. 

μῆκος. 44, 72, etc. Length. Lat. longitudo. μηκύνειν, ‘to en- 
large,’ in S§ 71, 137. 

μηχανή. 232. Machine. Lat. machina. The reference seems 
to be to the ‘deus ex machina.’ Cp. p. 250 supra. 

μικρολογεῖν. 06. Zo be trivial. Lat. de pusillis rebus loqui. The 
middle μικρολογεῖσθαι is more common, but the act. is used by 
Dionys. Hal., de adm. vi dic. in Dem. c. 21. 

μικροπρεπής. 93, 60, 84,103. Petty, trivial. Lat. tenuis, pusillus. 
The opposite of μεγαλοπρεπής. So μικροπρέπεια, ὃ 82. 

μικρότηςΞ. 4, 6, 36, 84. Luttleness, meanness. Lat. parvitas, exilt- 
tas. Cp. π. ὕψ. xllil. τ δεινὴ δ᾽ αἰσχῦναι τὰ μεγέθη Kai ἡ μικρότης τών 
ὀνομάτων. So μικρὸς in S$ 54, 61, 75; etc. 


204 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


μικτός. 41, 61, 286. Mixed, compounded. Τιαῖ. mixtus. 


μίμησις. 94, 112, 176, 220, 226. Limitation. Lat. imitatio. It 
will be seen that in ὃ 112 only is there any approach to a doctrine of 
‘imitation.’ μιμεῖσθαι occurs in S§ 24, 72, etc. ; μιμητικὸς in ὅδ 226, 
2098. 

μιμικός. 151. Suited for mimes. Lat. aptus mimis. The noun 
μῖμος does not occur in the z. ἑρμ.», Sophron’s mimes being described 
as δράματα § 156. 

μονόκωλος. 17. Consisting of a single member. Lat. unius mem- 
bri (periodus). Cp. Aristot. Ref. ul. g, 6. 


povootddaBos. 7. Monosyllabic, curt. Lat. unius syllabae (domt- 
nus). 

μουσικός, 69, 86, 176, 183, 185. Musical, accomplished. Lat. 
musicus, scitus. In ὃ 86 μουσικῶς might be translated ‘deftly.’ So 
μοῦσα, ‘harmony,’ in ὃ 71. 

μυγμός. δ΄. Moaning. Lat. gemitus. 


μῦθος. 76, 157. Legend. Lat. fabula. So μυθεύειν ‘to fable,’ 
in § 189. 

νουθετικός. 298. Admonitory, didactic. Lat. monitorius. νουθε- 
τεῖν occurs in ὃ 292. 

ξένος. 95, 139. Foreign, strange. Lat. peregrinus, tnusttatus. 
Cp. D. H. p. 197. Sometimes ‘distinguished,’ or ‘bizarre,’ will 
serve as a rendering of ξένος. For the use of uncommon words by 
the tragic poets, see Aristot. Poet. xxil. 14, 15. 


ξηροκακοζηλία. 239. Zasteless aridity. Lat. arida affectatio. The 
term, which is said to be modern, is explained in the section in 
which it is used. It does not occur elsewhere in Greek literature. 


ξηρός. 4, 236, 237, 238. Arid. Lat. aridus, siccus, tecunus. 
Fr. sec. Other English renderings might be: ‘dry,’ ‘bloodless,’ 
‘sapless,’ ‘lifeless,’ ‘bald,’ ‘jejune.’ Cp. 7. vy. ui. 3, Quintil. ii. 4, 3. 

ὄγκος. 36, 54, 66, 77, 83, 114, 119, 120, 247. Pomp, dignity. 
Lat. tumor, amplitudo. Fr. enflure, grandeur. The word oscillates 
between the favourable and the unfavourable sense, as will be seen 
from the instances in this treatise. The unfavourable meaning may 
be illustrated from 7. vy. ill. 4 κακοὶ δὲ ὄγκοι καὶ ἐπὶ σωμάτων καὶ 
λόγων, οἱ χαῦνοι Kal ἀναλήθεις καὶ μήποτε περιιστάντες ἡμᾶς εἰς 


τοὐναντίον: οὐδὲν γάρ φασι ξηρότερον ὑδρωπικοῦ 5 the favourable from 


GLOSSARY 295 


Chrysostom de Sacerdot. iv. 6 ἐγὼ δὲ εἰ μὲν τὴν λειότητα ᾿Ισοκράτους 
ἀπήτουν καὶ τὸν Δημοσθένους ὄγκον καὶ τὴν Θουκυδίδου σεμνότητα καὶ τὸ 
Πλάτωνος ὕψος, ἔδει φέρειν εἰς μέσον ταύτην τοῦ Παύλου τὴν μαρτυρίαν. 
(κόμπος is the word Chrysostom uses for the unfavourable meaning: 
εἰπὲ yap μοι, ποίῳ κόμπῳ λόγου IladAos ἔλεγεν ; GAN ὅμως τὴν oikov- 
μένην ἐπέστρεψεν. ποίῳ δὲ Πέτρος ὃ ἀγράμματος; Hom. 3 in Ep. 2 
ad Thessal. c. 2.) For Aristotle’s use of the word, see /het. iil. 6 
and also E. Arieth’s article (in Wiener Studien, 1900, 1. pp. 11—17), 
Die Bedeutung von ὄγκος bei Aristoteles (Eth. Nic. x. 7).—The adj. 
ὀγκηρὸς occurs in π. ἕρμ. S$ τος, 176, 177, 207; ὀγκώδης in ὃ 228; 
ὑπέρογκος in ὅδ 116, 221. In other authors the verbs ὀγκοῦν and 
διογκοῦν are sometimes found.—Cp. 2. #. p. 198. 


ὁμαλής. 48,295. Level, even. Lat. aeguadbilis. 


ὁμοιοτέλευτος. 26, 268. Having similar terminations. Lat. similiter 
desinens. Cp. Cic. Or. 135 “‘aut cum similiter vel cadunt verba 
vel desinunt” (i.e. ὁμοιόπτωτον and ὁμοιοτέλευτον), and Auct. ad Her. 
iv. 20 “similiter desinens est, cum, tametsi casus non insunt in verbis, 
tamen similes exitus sunt, hoc pacto: turpiter audes facere, nequiter 
studes dicere; vivis invidiose, delinquis studiose, loqueris odiose.” 
Of such artificial figures the author of the π. ἑρμ. rightly says: οὔτε 
δῆτα ἐν δεινότητι χρήσιμα τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὡς ἔδειξα, οὔτε ἐν πάθεσι καὶ 
ἤθεσιν. Demosthenes avoids homoeoteleuton, whereas Isocrates and 
his disciples (e.g. Theopompus) use it freely. For ὁμοιοτέλευτον in 
relation to παρομοίωσις, see D. H. p. 199. Cp. Aristot. Ahez. i. 9, 9. 


ὄνομα. 23,49, et passim. Word. Lat. verbum. In the π. ἑρμ. 
it seems never to be used with the special sense of ‘noun.’ Cp. 
D. H. p. 198, and 5. v. ἄρθρον p. 269 supra.—In § 91, 304 ὀνομασία 
= ‘naming,’ ‘appellatio’; i.e. the application of words to things. 


ὀνοματουργεν. 95. Zo form words. Lat. verba fingere. The 
same meaning as ὀνοματοποιεῖν, which does not occur in the treatise. 


ὀρθός. 201. Nominative. Lat. rectus. πτῶσις 6p0n=casus rectus. 
The case-terminology of the z. ἕρμ. is more developed than that of 
Aristotle: cp. airvatixy.in this section, εὐθεῖα and πλαγιότης In ὃ τοῦ, 
τὸ πλάγιον In ὃ 104. See also s.v. πτώσις p. 300 infra. 


πάθος. 28 (quater), 57, 94, 214. Lmotion, passion. Lat. affectus 
(Quintil. vi. 2, 8), antmi motus (Cic. de Or. i. 5, 17), perturbatio 
(id. Zusc. iv. 5, 10).—Cp. the adv. παθητικῶς in § 57. 


290 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


παίγνιον. 120,143. un. Lat. Zusws. The reference is to guips: 
cp. παίζειν ὃ 120, παιγνία ὃ 171, παιδιὰ § 250. 

παίων. 38, 39,43. A paecon. Lat. pacon. Alike in Greek and 
in Latin the two forms παίων and παιάν, pacon and faean, are used 
for this metrical foot.—The bearing of the author’s conception of 
the acon upon the date of the π. ἑρμ. is excellently discussed in 
Dahl’s dissertation entitled “‘ Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας," pp. 99—101. 
—The adj. παιωνικὸς occurs in §§ 38, 41, 43. 

παραβολή. 89 (bis), 146 (bis), 147, 209, 274. mage, imagery. 
Lat. collatio. Cp. Quintil. v. 11, 23 ‘‘nam παραβολή, quam Cicero 
collationem vocat, longius res quae comparentur repetere solet.” 


παράδειγμα. 182, 194, etc. Justance, example. Lat. exemplum. 
(Not used, as in Aristot. /er., of a rhetorical induction.) 


παραδύεσθαι. 181. Zo steal upon. Lat. irrepere. Of a pleasing 
literary sensation. 


παραλαμβάνειν. δ, 72, etc. 70. introduce, to employ. Lat. 
assumere, adthibere. 


παράλειψις, 263. Practermission. Lat. praeteritio. Fr. prétérition. 
The frequent occurrence of the verb παραλείπειν in Demosth. de Cor. 
is enough to justify the recognition of this ‘figure. Cp. Zfzst. ¢o 
the Hebrews Xi. 32. 


mapdévopa. 59. Addition. Lat. appendix. ‘The word is am. εἰρ.: 
the metaphor is possibly that of a dint, or nail-mark, on a piece 
of statuary. 

παραπληρωματικόςς. 90. Lxpletive. Lat. expletivus. Fr. expletive. 
The adj., like the noun παραπλήρωμα, is late. Cp. Dionys. Hal. 
de adm. vt dic. in Dem. c. 19 πολλὰ τοιαῦτά ἐστι παραπληρώματα 
καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ὀλίγου δεῖν περίοδον οὐκ ἀναγκαίαν ἔχοντα χώραν, ἃ ποιεῖ 
τὴν ἑρμηνείαν ἀμετροτέραν, τὴν δὲ περίοδον κομψοτέραν : id. 126. Cc. 39 
παραπληρώματα τῶν ὀνομάτων οὐκ ἀναγκαῖα -- (1Ἰο. Or. “inculcata 
Inania quaedam verba quasi complementa numerorum.” 

παραποιεῖν. 98. Zo counterfeit. Lat. imitari, simulare. In a 
slightly different sense, Aristot. Δ οί. ul. 11, 6. 


mapaonpos. 208. Stamped awry, eccentric. Lat. perperam sig- 
natus. 


παρασιωπᾶν. 62. 70 pass over in silence. Lat. selere. Fr. passer 
sous silence. Quintilian ix. 3, 99 mentions a figure of παρασιώπησις. 


GLOSSAR V 297 


παρατεχνολογεῖν. 178. Zo introduce trrelevantly in a treatise. 
Lat. practer institutum proferre. 


παρέλκειν. 98. Zo be superfiuous. Lat. abundare. ‘The intransi- 
tive use of παρέλκειν, in the sense ‘is dragged in,’ is late,—Arrian, 
Sext. Empir., Clem. Alex., etc. Diog. Laert. (vii. 195), however, 
gives as the title of a work of Chrysippus: Περὶ τῶν παρελκόντων 
λόγων πρὸς ἸΤασύλον β΄. For the more usual construction, cf. Dionys. 
Hal. de Thucyd. c. 19 ὥστε τὰ πολλὰ ἐκεῖνα Kal καταβλητικὰ τοῦ 
μεγέθους τῆς Ἑλλάδος οὐκ ἀναγκαίως αὐτῷ παρέλκεσθαι. For examples, 
in the Ravenna scholia, of both παρέλκει and παρέλκεται with the 
meaning ‘is redundant,’ see Rutherford, Scholia Aristophanica ii. 579. 


παρεμφαίνειν. 67. 70. give a passing impression. Lat. obiter 
wndicare. Cp. Dionys. Hal. de Comp. Verb. c. 6 ποίας παρεμφαίνοντα 
διαφορὰς χρόνων. 

παρόμοιος. 20 (ter), 28, 29, 247. Szmilar. Lat. assimilis. The 
reference is to the figure παρομοίωσις (‘like letter,’ Puttenham), for 
which see the references in D. H. pp. 199, 200: and add Volkmann 
op. cit. pp. 479, 482, 514, Norden of. cit. 1. 59, Cic. Orat. δὲ 38, 175. 


mapovopatey. 97. Zo modify a word. Lat. verbum leviter com- 
mutare. ‘Vhe reference is to the derivation of a new form from an 
existing word (cp. Strab. Geogr. xi. 518 τὰ μὲν καινὰ ἔθεσαν, τὰ δὲ 
παρωνόμασαν), and not to the usual technical sense of Tapovopacia, 
for which see D. ZH. p. 200. 


πεζός. 90, 93, 167. Ln prose, prosaic. Lat. pedester. λόγος 
πεζός, Or λόγοι meCot,=oratio pedestris. Cp. D. H. p. 200. 


πεποιημένος. 94, 98, 144, 191, 220. Lnvented, newly-coined. Lat. 
factus, novatus (Cic. de Orat. 111. 38, 154; 1. 34, 155). On the 
general question of ὀνοματοποιία, or the formation of new words 
~ (especially in imitation of natural sounds), see Quintil. i. 5, 71, 
where Latin conservatism (as compared with Greek enterprise) is 
clearly indicated: “ usitatis (sc. verbis) tutius utimur, nova non sine 
quodam periculo fingimus. nam si recepta sunt, modicam laudem 
afferunt orationi; si repudiata, etiam in 1ocos exeunt. audendum 
tamen; namque, ut Cicero ait, etiam quae primo dura visa sunt, 
usu molliuntur. sed minime nobis concessa est ὀνοματοποιία : quis 
enim ferat, si quid simile illis merito laudatis Atyfe βιός et σίζε 
ὀφθαλμός fingere audeamus? iam ne éalare quidem aut Aznnire 
fortiter diceremus, nisi 1udicio vetustatis niterentur”: so vill. 6, 31, 


298 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


32 tid. It was a principle of Julius Caesar “tamquam scopulum 
fugere inauditum atque insolens verbum” (Aul. Gell. i. x.: see 
p. 260 supra). For the Latin language, as later for the French, 
this fastidious avoidance of novel terms was not altogether an 
advantage. Cp. D. @. p. 200. 


πέρας. 3. Limit. Lat. jimis. Cp. Aristot. Ref. 111. 8, 2, to- 
gether with Cope’s Zntroduction p. 303. In ὃ 2 περιγραφὴ is used. 

περιαγωγή. 19, 45 (bis), 202, 244. A rounding. Lat. circum- 
actio, circumductus, rotunditas periodica, orationis ambitus. With ἐκ 
περιαγωγῆς in ὃ 45 cp. Anon. 7. σχημάτων (Sp. Rh. Gr. ill. p. 114) 
ws ἐκ περιαγωγῆς συντεθειμένον (συντιθέναι Ἰγετε -- τῇ συνθέσει λέγειν 
in § 45); and with πειρᾶσθαι «rr. ἴῃ ὃ 202 cp. Quintil. vill. 2, 22 
“nobis prima sit virtus perspicuitas, propria verba, rectus ordo, non 
in longum dilata conclusio.” The use is late, as is that of περιάγειν 
in §§ το, 30. 

περιεξεσμένος. 14 Polished. Lat. politus. Cp. aéectos as used 
by Soph. Oed. Col. 19, and by Schol. ad Aristoph. Ran. 86. 


περιέργως. 122. Like an exquisite. Lat. delicate, eleganter. Cp. 
Plut. Moral. 693 B αἱ γυναῖκες φυκούμεναι καὶ μυριζόμεναι Kal χρυσὸν 
φοροῦσαι καὶ πορφύραν περίεργοι δοκοῦσιν. In ὃ 122 περιέργως seems 
to be used in the same sense as the rhetorical and _ post-classical 
περιεργία, 1.6. ‘over-labour; otherwise called the curious’ (Puttenham: 
cp. D. H. p. 201). Cp. Quintil. vill. 3, 55 “‘est etiam, quae περιεργία 
vocatur, supervacua, ut sic dixerim, operositas, ut a diligenti curiosus 
et a religione superstitio distat.” 

περίοδος. 10, 11, et passim. Period. Lat. pertodus, verborum 
ambitus, etc. On the general question of the period, cp. 7. vy. 
p. 205, D. H. p. 201, Volkmann fet. pp. 507 ff., Cope’s Lntro- 
duction pp. 306 ἢ, Hammer Dem. π. ἑρμ. pp. 8—13, Norden, 
Kunstprosa 1. Ὁ. 42 ἢ. 2. Various Latin equivalents will be found 
in Quintil. ix. 4, S§ 22, 124; Cic. Or. 61, ὃ 204; Causeret Langue 
de la Rhét. dans Cicéron pp. 135, 136.—The verb περιοδεύειν occurs 
n S$ 11, 229; the adj. περιοδὶκὸς in S§ 13, 16, 33. 

ΠΕεριπατητικοί, 181. Peripatetics. Lat. Peripatetici. It is an 
indication of late date that Aristotle and his followers should be 
spoken of thus collectively: cp. Introduction p. 53. 


περισσοτεχνία. 247. Unnecessary claboration. Lat. studium inane, 
nimium ornandi studium. The word is found only here.—The adj. 
περιττὸς in S$ 77, 221: cp. D. 7. p. 201. 


GLOSSARY 299 


πιθανότης. 208, 221. FPersuasiveness. Lat. probabilitas, vert- 
stmilitudo.—The adj. πιθανὸς in §§ 208, 221, 222. 


mpas. 177. Pungently. Lat. amare. Cp. D. AH. p. 201 
S.v. πικρός (=Fr. caustigue). 


πλάγιος. 104, 198. Oblique. Lat. obliqguus. Used with special 
reference to the ‘casus obliqui,’ as opposed to the ‘casus rectus.’ 
So πλαγιότης, $ 198. 

πλάσις. 158. J/nvention. Lat. fictio. So προσπλάσσειν in the 
same section. Cp. πλάσσειν ὃ 296, πλάσμα S$ 177, 298. 


πλάτος 177. Breadth. Lat. latitudo. So πλατὺς and πλατύτης 
in the same section: cp. Theocr. xv. 88, quoted on p. 242 supra. 
Ernesti (Lex. Techn. Gr. Rh. pp. 270, 271) has a good article on the 
various meanings of πλατύτης : and similarly on πλάσμα (pp. 268, 
269 zbid.). i 

πλεονάζειν. 80. 70 be expanded. Lat. amplificari. Used of a 
metaphor when expanded into a simile. 


ποιητικός. 70, 89, etc.  Loetical. Lat. poeticus. In ὃ 249 the 
word = ‘efficient’: cp. D. ΖΦ. p. 202.-- ποίησις and ποίημα also occur 
frequently in the π᾿ épu., and the difference between them is well 
illustrated by S$ 166, 167. Cp. διήγημα, p. 275 supra. 

ποικιλία. 73, 92. Variety, decoration. Lat. varietas. So ποικίλος 
§ 267, and (in an illustration) ποικίλλειν ἃ 164. Cp. D. #. p. 202. 

πολυηχία. 73. Variety of sound. Lat. plurium vocalium sonus. 
The word is az. <ip. 

πολύκωλος. 202. With many members: of a period. Lat. 
multorum membrorum. 


πόρρωθεν. 78. From a distance. Lat. e longinguo. Used of 
far-fetched metaphors—‘metaphorae e longinquo petitae, longe 
translatae.’ 

πρᾶγμα. 11, 22, etc. Swudject-matteyr (usually in the plural). 
Lat. ves. Cp. πραγματικὸς D. 47. p. 203, 7. ὕψ. p. 206. 


πρᾷος. 269, 293, 295. Mild, tame. Lat. mitis. 


πρεπόντως. 11,276. Appropriately. Lat. decenter. Cp. πρέπειν, 
ὃν 6, 72, 120, ete. 


προαίρεσις. 168. Purpose. Lat. consilium. Cp. προαιρεῖσθαι in 
the same section. 


300 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


mpoxatapkticés. 98, 39. Jnztial. Lat. cnitialis, principalis. 
Late,—Plutarch, etc. 

πρόλογος. 153. Prologue: that part of a play which precedes 
the first chorus (Aristot. Poet. xii. 4). Lat. prologus. 


προοίμιον. 32. Opening, introduction. Lat. exordium. 


προσδοκία. 152, 153. Lxpectation. Lat. exspectatio. The 
reference is tO σκώμματα παρὰ προσδοκίαν (‘notissimum ridiculi 
genus,” Cic. de Or. il. 63, 255: in allusion to the “iocus praeter 
exspectationem.” Cp. Quintil. villi. 5, 15, and Tiber. 7. σχημ- 
Sp. 11. 66). A good Greek example will be found in Aristot. et. 
111. r1, 6, and in English we have such instances as “Than that 
all-softening, overpowering knell, | The tocsin of the soul—the 
dinner-bell” (Byron, Don Juan v); “‘ Here thou, great Anna, whom 
three realms obey, | Dost sometimes counsel take—and sometimes 
tea” (Pope, Rape of the Lock 11). Limprévu a aussi du charme. 

προσεικάζειν. 83. 70 liken. Lat. comparare. 

προσθήκη. 90. Addition, appendage. Lat. additamentum. 

πρόσφορος. 99, 120, 158, 190, 276. Swztable. Lat. aptus, accom- 
modatus. . 

προσφώνημα. 111. An address. Lat. allocutio, compellatio. 

πρόσφυμα. 99. An accretion. Lat. accretio. ‘The word is az. 
eip. (Liddell and Scott refer to Walz vil. 1213; but this is simply the 
transcript of the 7. ἑρμ. by Gregorius Corinthius). 

πρόσωπον. 130, 134, 195, 234, 266. Person. Lat. persona. The 
word is post-classical in this sense. In ἢ 265 προσωποποιΐα =“ per- 
sonification’: cp. ὃἣ 266, and Cic. de Or. ili. 53, 205, Quintil. 
ἿΣ Dy 21 

πρόχειρο. 261. Ready, smart. Jat. alacer. The reference 
here is to ready wit ; in ὃ 281 προχείρως = ‘inconsiderately,’ ‘ bluntly.’ 


πτῶσις. 60, 201. Grammatical case. Lat. casus. In thew. ἑρμ. 
the doctrine of the cases is more fully developed (perhaps through 
the influence of Chrysippus) than in Aristotle, who applies the term 
πτῶσις to inflexions in general. Cp. δὲ 104, 198, and p. 295 supra. 


πυκνότης. 42, 251. Close succession. Lat. crebritas. The adj. 
πυκνὸς in S§ 67, 78, ete. 

ῥῆσις. 216. Speech, reply. Lat. oratio, responsto. The words 
ἢ λεγομένη ἀπὸ Σκυθῶν ῥῆσις, of a brutal answer, derive from Herod. 


GLOSSARY 301 


iv. 127. (The word does not occur in the z. épu. in its special 
sense of a speech in a play. But the verb pyropevew is so used 
in § 153.) 

ῥητορεέαΨ. 9, 12. A piece of oratory. Lat. oratio rhetorices 
artijicio elaborata. In ὃ 12 ῥητορειῶν is an emendation for ῥητῶν. 
Cp. Isocr. Phil. 26, Panath. 2. 


ῥήτωρ. 24, 262,275,287. Orator, rhetorician. Lat. orator. Germ. 
Redner. These sections refer to the Greek rhetors at various epochs, 
from Sicilian times down to those of the writer himself.—In ὃ το, the 
adj. ῥητορικὸς is used to describe one of the three kinds of period. 


ῥυθμοειδής. 221. Rhythmical. Lat. numerosus. Late,—Dionys. 
Hal. de Lsocr. 2, etc.—pvOpos itself occurs in §§ 183, 184, 245. 


σάτυρος. 169. A satyric play. Lat. satyrus. Cp. n. on p. 240 
supra. So σατυρικός, ὃ 143. 

σαφήνεια. 197, 203. Clearness. Lat. perspicuitas. Fr. clarté, 
netteté. For brevity as tending to obscurity, cp. Dionys. Halic. Zp. 
ad Amm. 11. c. 2 (ad fin.). The adj. σαφὴς in δὲ 77, 82, etc. 

σεμνότης. 44, 56. Gravity, majesty. Lat. granditas. The adj. 
σεμνὸς in S$ 18, 19, εἴς. 

onpeddys. 208. Striking, remarkable. Lat. insignis, reconditus. 
Cp. D. H. p. 205. The word, in this meaning, is late,—Strabo, 
Dionysius, etc. 

σκοτεινός. 192. Dark, obscure. Lat. obscurus, tenebricosus. 
Heracleitus ὃ σκοτεινὸς 15 in question. 


σκυθίζειν. 96. 70 use Scythian words. Lat. sermonem adhibere 
Scythicum. Cp. φρυγίζειν, p. 307 infra. 

σκῶμμα. 128, 172. Jest, gibe. Lat. dictum, opprobrium. The 
verb σκώπτειν in $§ 145, 150, 167. 

σμικρύνειν. 236. 70. belittle, to depreciate. Lat. extenuare. 
Late, -LXX., Appian, etc. Cp. κατασμικρύνειν, p. 287 supra. 


σοφιστικός. 15. Artificial, formal. Lat.exguisttus. Fr. travaille. 
The meaning is ‘strained,’ ‘bookish,’ ‘ professorial,’ as opposed to 
‘natural’ or ‘unsophisticated, σοφιστὴς being = Kunstredner (cp. 
πὸ OW: Ρ 207). 

σπειρᾶσθαι. 8. Zo be coiled. Lat. in gyros contrahi. Late,— 
Eratosth., Lucian, Pausanias, etc. 


302 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


στίχος. 72,150,189. Lene of poetry. Lat. versus. 


στοιχεῖον. 207. Llement, elementary sound. Lat. elementum. 
Defined by Aristot. Poet. c. xx. 2 as φωνὴ ἀδιαίρετος, οὐ πᾶσα δέ, ἀλλ᾽ 
ἐξ ἧς πέφυκε συνετὴ γίγνεσθαι φωνή. Used in ὃ 207 of vowel-sounds. 


στρογγύλοςς. 20, 248. Rounded. Lat. rvotundus. Fr. arrondt. 
See the references given in D. ZH p. 205. 


στωμύλος. 151. Gossipy. Lat. loguax. στωμύλον τι seems to 
be partly favourable, partly unfavourable,—‘a kind of raciness,’ 
‘a flavour of gossip.’ 


σύγγραμμα. 228, 234. Treatise. Lat. commentarius. In ὃ 234, 
σύγγραμμα ἀντ᾽ ἐπιστολῆς means a ‘work,’ or ‘volume,’ taking the 
place of a letter. Germ. Abhandlung. 


συγκαταλήγειν. 2. Zo end simultaneously. Vat. semul desinere. 
Late,—Gregorius of Nyssa (4th century A.D.). 

σύγκρουσις. 68 (bis), 70, 72 (bis), 73, 74, 174, 299, 301. Coldszon, 
shock, clashing, concurrence, consonance. Lat. concursus. Fr. rencontre. 
In §§ 68, 299 σύγκρουσις φωνηέντων = hiatus; and in other passages 
φωνηέντων, though not expressed, must be supplied. As ‘hiatus’ 
usually has a somewhat depreciatory sense, ‘open vowels’ may 
sometimes serve as a rendering (cp. Pope’s “ though oft the ear the 
open vowels tire”). In ὃ 174, σύγκρουσις is applied to the concurrence 
of consonants. On the general question of hiatus, cp. Volkmann 
Rhetorik p. 513, Rehdantz-Blass ?het. u. Stil. Index p. 21, Sandys 
Orator of Cicero pp. 160—163; and see the passage of Quintilian 
quoted s.v. συναλοιφὴ infra.—The verb συγκρούειν is found in δὲ 68, 
70, 72, 73, 207 (cp. συμπλήσσειν). 

συλλαβή. 25, 26, 117,177. Syllable. Lat. sylaba. 


συλλογισμός. 32. Demonstrative argument, syllogism. Lat. ratio- 
cinatio, syllogismus. In the same section the enthymeme is described 
as συλλογισμὸς ῥητορικὸς and συλλογισμὸς areAys.—The verb συλλο- 
γίζεσθαι occurs twice in § 32. 


σύμβολον. 243 (bis). Symbolic expression. Lat. signum, indicium. 
The reference is to the use of adAnyopia. 

συμμετρία. 16. Due proportion. Lat. usta mensura. The 
opposite of ἀμετρία: see s.v. ἄμετρος p. 265 supra. 


σύμπληξις. 48, 105, 207, 299 (bis). Clashing, concurrence. Lat. 
concursus. Cp. ovyxpovois.—The verb συμπλήσσειν in 88 68, 69. 


GLOSSARY 303 


συναλοιφή. 70. lending, fusion. Lat. coitus, vocalium eltsio. 
Fr. synalephe (contraction, ou jonction de plusieurs voyelles). For the 
general question of hiatus and elision, see Quintil. ix. 4, 35—37 
“quare ut neglegentiae passim hoc pati, ita humilitatis ubique 
perhorrescere, nimiosque non immerito in hac cura putant omnes 
Isocraten secutos praecipueque Theopompum. at Demosthenes et 
Cicero modice respexerunt ad hanc partem. nam et coeuntes 
litterae, quae συναλοιφαὶ dicuntur, etiam leniorem faciunt orationem, 
quam si omnia verba suo fine cludantur, et nonnumquam hiulca 
etiam decent faciuntque ampliora quaedam, ut fwlchra oratione ista 
zacta te, cam longae per se et velut opimae syllabae aliquid etiam 
medii temporis inter vocales, quasi intersistatur, adsumunt. qua de 
re utar Ciceronis potissimum verbis. abet, inquit, le tamguam 
hiatus et concursus vocalium molle quiddam, et quod indicet non 
ingratam neglegentiam de re hominis magis quam de verbis laborantis.” 
συναλοιφὴ is a late word,—Strabo, Dionys. Halic., etc.—The verb 
συναλείφειν occurs in the same section: cp. Lat. conzungere, Cic. 
Or. 44, 150.—There are some interesting remarks on ‘the rule of 
the synalcepha’ in Dryden’s Zssays (selected and edited by W. P. 
en) ΠΡ. τοῦ hn. 


συναρτᾶν. 12, 193. Zo knit together. Lat. colligare. A closer 
union is implied by this word than by συνάπτειν, δὲ 269, 295, 299. 


συνάφεια. 63,182. Combination. Lat. connexio. Fr. connexion, 
liaison. In ὃ 63, συνάφεια is used of polysyndeton, as opposed to 
asyndeton (λύσις, διάλυσις). As the author points out, both these 
‘figures conduce to elevation, each in its place. He remarks that 
the repeated use of the conjunction ‘and’ in the sentence “ΤῸ the 
war flocked Greeks and Carians and Lycians and Pamphylians and 
Phrygians” produces the impression of an innumerable host. For 
English examples, cp. Revelation vi. 15 ‘And the kings of the earth, 
and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and 
the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid 
themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains”; and 
vil. 9 “And these things I saw, and behold, a great multitude, which 
no man could number, out of every nation, and of all tribes and 
peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the 
Lamb, arrayed in white robes, and palms in their hands.” So in 
Matthew Arnold’s Sohrvab and Rustum: “ Kalmucks and unkempt 
Kuzzaks, tribes who stray | Nearest the Pole, and wandering 


304 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Kirghizzes,” etc. Puttenham gives the name ‘couple-clause’ to 
the figure; it has also sometimes been described as ‘ Many-ands,’ 
as distinguished from ‘ No-ands’ (asyndeton). Cp. Quintil. ix. 3, 
51.—As examples of the analogous figure of paradiastole (or accu- 
mulation of negative conjunctions), cp. Demosth. de Cor. § 298 
ἐμὲ οὔτε καιρὸς οὔτε φιλανθρωπία λόγων ovr ἐπαγγελιῶν μέγεθος οὔτ᾽ 
ἐλπὶς οὔτε φόβος ovr ἄλλο οὐδὲν ἐπῆρεν οὐδὲ προηγάγετο ὧν ἔκρινα 
δικαίων καὶ συμφερόντων τῇ πατρίδι οὐδὲν προδοῦναι, and Lprstle to 
the Romans vill. 38, 39 ‘‘For I am persuaded, that neither death, 
nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, 
nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, 
shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ 
Jesus our Lord.” 

σύνδεσμος. 23 (bis), 53 (ter), 54, 55, 56, 63, 64, 193, 194, 196 (bis), 
257 (bis), 268, 269.  Cozzunction, connective. Lat. copula, coniunctio. 
‘Particle’ will sometimes be a convenient rendering, since the term 
is (δὲ 55, 56, 196) used of μέν, δή, etc., as well as of ‘conjunctions’ 
strictly so called. See the full account of the word in Cope’s Zxtro- 
duction to Aristotles Rhetoric pp. 371 —374, 392—397.-—The verb 
συνδεῖν In S§ 192, 194; σύνδεσις in δὴ 12, 303. 

συνειρμός. 180. A joining together. Lat. connexio, continuata 
series. The word is az. eip. The verb συνείρεσθαι occurs in ὃ 15 
with reference to the ‘stringing together’ of periods. 


συνεξαίρειν. 9. Zo elevate simultaneously. Lat. semul extollere. 
Cp. ἐξαίρειν, §§ 234, 277. The word is late,—Polybius, Diodorus, ete. 


συνεστραμμένος. 20, 177. Compact. Lat. contortus, rotundus. 
For ‘contortus,’ cp. Cic. Or. 19, 66. 


συνέχεια. 68, 117,118. Succession. Lat. continuatio. The adj. 
συνεχὴς occurs in S$ 12, 47, 82, 98, 118, 251, 303, and means 
‘continuous, ‘unbroken.’ So in § 102 τὸ συνεχὲς = ‘continuity,’ 
‘exaggeration, ‘excess’: cp. Aristot. Poet. 22, 5. In ὃ 82, where 
συνεχῶς is oddly placed if it goes with γινόμενον, it has been suggested 
that the word may be taken with προσηγόρευσεν in the sense (not 
otherwise established: unless συνεχώς ὀνόματι in ὃ 98 --παραπλησίως 
ὀνόματι) οἵ ‘appropriately.’ 

συνήθεια. 69, 86, 87 (bis), 91, 95, 275. Usage, ordinary speech. 
Lat. consuetudo, usus. In Dionys. Hal. ad Amm. 11. c. 11 ἡ κοινὴ 
συνήθεια is found in the same sense. If P’s reading τῆς ἀληθείας 


GLOSSARY 305 


be retained in ὃ 91, we should compare Dionys. Hal. de /saeo c. 18 
ὅτι μοι δοκεῖ Λυσίας μὲν τὴν ἀλήθειαν διώκειν μᾶλλον, ᾿Ισαῖος δὲ τὴν 
τέχνην, and de Lys. c. 8 τὴν ἀλήθειαν οὖν τις ἐπιτηδεύων κτλ.-- Ἴδε adj. 
συνήθης occurs in §§ 60, 67, 77; 96, 145, 190. 

σύνθεσις. 4, 8, 9, et passim. Composition, arrangement of words. 
Lat. compositio, collocatio (cp. Cic. de Or. 111. 171). Fr. arrangement 
des mots, disposition. The word occurs in the title of Dionysius’ 
treatise Περὶ συνθέσεως ὀνομάτων. 

σύνθετος. 18, 34, 35, 91, etc. Composite. Lat. compositus. 

σύνταξις. 229. Structure. Lat. structura. The usual rhetorical 
sense of σύνταξις is ‘treatise’; but it is also used of ‘arrangement,’ as 
by Aristid. Zechn. Rhet. (Sp. ii. 507) σύνταξις κώλων καὶ κομμάτων εἰς 
διάνοιαν ἀπηρτισμένη φράσις. Cp. the use of τάξις in the 7. ἑρμ. 

συντέλεια. 214. Consummation, past tense. Lat. perfectio, prae- 
teritum (tempus).—The verb συντελεῖν in § 3. 

συντιθέναι. 69, 91, etc. Zo form, to compound. Lat. componere. 

συντομία. 92, 103, 137, 138, 253. Conciseness. Lat. succincta 
brevitas. Fr. concision. So σύντομος, $§ 7, 89, 197, ete. 

σύστημα. 10. A composite whole, a collection. Lat. coagmentatzo. 
—In ὃ 30, σύστασις = constitutio. 

συστέλλειν. 204, 228, 239. Zo compress. Lat. contrahere.—In 
§ 14, συστολὴ = spareness. 

συστροφή. 8, 10. Concentration. Lat. conversio, concinna brevt- 
tas. So Dionys. Hal. de Thucyd. 53, de adm. vi dic. in Dem. 18. 
Cp. συνεστραμμένος, p- 304 Supra. 

σφίγγειν. 244. 700 bind tight. Lat. constringere. Fr. resserrer. 

σφοδρός. 7,274. Vehement. Lat. vehemens. So ogodporns, ὃ 241. 

σχῆμα. 24, 30, 59, et passim. Figure. Lat. figura. By σχήματα 
are meant artificial ‘figures,’ or ‘forms,’ of language (‘‘ sententiarum 
orationisque formis, quae vocant σχήματα, Cic. Brut. 69: σχῆμά 
ἐστιν ἐξάλλαξις φράσεως ἀπὸ τοῦ καταλλήλου ἐπὶ TO κρεῖττον μετά τινος 
ἀναλογίας, Herodian π. σχημάτων init.). Cp. D. H. p. 206; and see 
further Modern Language Notes 1. p. 140, for a short paper on the 
“Classification of Rhetorical Figures’ by C. B. Bradley. 

σχηματίζειν. 287, 289, 292, 293, 294. 70 use a figure, to shape, 
to construct. Lat. figurare. λόγος ἐσχηματισμένος (or τὸ ἐσχημα- 


R. 20 


306 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


τισμένον simply) means oratio figurata, le discours figuré,—that 
‘figured language’ which is often designed to veil the thought.— 
In ὃ 298, cynpaticpos=‘the employment of figures’ (cp. D. Z#. 
p. 207): Lat. conformatio, figuratio. 

Σωκρατικός. 297. Socratic. Lat. Socraticus. The ‘Socratic’ 
dialogues are here in question. 

Σωτάδειος. 189. Sotadean. Lat. Sotadeus. The reference is to 
the measures (μέτρα) of Sotades: cp. p. 244 supra. 

τάξις. 139, 170, 199, 200, 248. Order. Lat. dispositio. The 
verb τάσσειν in ὃ 1309. 


τάχος. 137, 197. Rapidity. Lat. celeritas. Cp. τὸ τάχος τῆς 
σημασίας (with reference to Thucydides) in Dionys. Hal. ad Amm. 
1 © Bs ; 

τελευτή. 207. Lnd, termination. Lat. terminatio. Cp. τελευταῖος 
§$ 139, 206.—reAos in S§ 139, 206, 244, 272. 

τερθρέα. 27. Artifice. Lat. nimium studium. Suidas gives 
λεπτολογία as an equivalent of τερθρεία. The word was regarded 
as specifically Attic; but cp. Jebb’s AZZ. Or. 11. 58. 

τεχνολογεῖν. 41. Zo state in a treatise. Lat. im arte tradere. 
Cp. παρατεχνολογεῖν on p. 297 Supra, and rexvoAoyia in 7. ὕψ. p. 208. 
In ὃ 169 τέχναι may be used in the sense of artes, handbooks. 

τόπος. 136, 189, 153, 156, 169. Place, heading, source. Lat. 
Zocus. It will be remembered that, according to Aristot. R/ez 11. 26, 
τόπος 15 a head under which many rhetorical arguments fall: ἐστιν 
γὰρ στοιχεῖον καὶ τόπος, εἰς ὃ πολλὰ ἐνθυμήματα ἐμπίπτει. 

τραγῳδία. 169. Zragedy. Lat. tragoedia. τραγῳδία παίζουσα 
would be a kind of ἱλαροτραγῳδία: cp. ἱλαρός, p. 285 supra. 

τραχύτης. 177. Roughness. Lat. asperitas. Fr. dureté. So 
τραχύς, SS 48, 49, 176. 

τρίκωλος. 17. Consisting of three members. Lat. trimembris. 
The term is applied to a three-membered period. 


tp(perpos. 204, 205. Having three measures. Lat. trimetrus. 
In these sections κῶλα τρίμετρα seem to be conceived on the analogy 
of tau Bos τρίμετρος. 

τρόπος. 120, 170, 179, 185, 207, 223, 224, 259, 282. Manner. 
Lat. ratio, modus. In ὃ 120 τρόποις has sometimes been understood 
in the rhetorical sense (not elsewhere found in the =. ἑρμ.) of ‘trope.’ 


GLOSSARY 307 


ὕλη. 76,163. Sudject-matter. Lat. materia. 

ὑμέναιος. 132. Bridal song. Lat. hymenaeus. 

ὑπερβολή. 48, 52, 124, 125, etc. Lxcess, hyperbole (‘the over- 
reacher, Puttenham). Lat. superlatio, traiectio. ὑπερβολικὸς S§ 283, 
285 ; ὑπερβάλλειν S§ 114, 115, etc. 

ὑπέρμετρος. 118. Gong beyond metre or measure. Lat. superans 
mensuram, Cp, ὑπερπίπτει τοῦ λογικοῦ μέτρου ὃ 42. 

ὑπέρογκος. 116, 221. Jnjflated, pompous. Lat. inflatus, turgidus. 

ὑπόθεσις. 76. Subject, theme. Τί. argumentum.—in ὃ 296, 
ὑποθετικῶς = ‘ suggestively.’ 

ὑποκατασκευάζεν. 224. 70. elaborate slightly. Lat. paulum 
elaborare. Late,—Josephus, Clem. Alex., Origen, etc. 

ὑποκεῖσθαι. 44, 237,255. Zo underlie. Lat. subesse. τὸ ὑποκεί- 
μενον πρᾶγμα = ‘the subject-matter.’ 

ὑπόκρισις. 193, 195, 271. Acting, delivery. Lat. studium 
histrionum, actio, pronuntiatio.—iroxpiverOa S§ 193, 1943; ὑποκριτὴς 
58, 195, 226; ὑποκριτικὸς 193, 194, 195. 

ὑπονοεῖν. 100, 103, 243, 254. Zo suspect. Lat. suspicari. Cp. 
ὑπόνοια, ‘hidden thought,’ ‘ hidden meaning’; and see s.v. ἀλληγορία 
p- 264 supra. 

φιλοφρόνησις. 231, 232. Lxpression of friendship. Lat. amicitiae 
declaratio. Late word,—Dionys. Hal., Plutarch, Josephus, etc. 

φοβερός. 130, 2838. Awe-inspiring. Lat. terribilis. Cp. D. ZA. 
p. 208. 

φράσις. 17. Lxpression. Lat. elocutio. The word occurs once 
only in the z. épu.; and that as a quoted (or invented) example. 
The verb φράζειν is found in ὃ 138, and ἐκφράζειν in ὃ 165. 

φροντίς. 27, 171, 218, 300. Anxious care. Lat. sollicitudo. 
Fr. soin minutieux. The word is used of studied and artificial 
expression. In ὃ 27 it is coupled with τερθρεία, and in ὃ 300 it is 
contrasted with τὸ ἀφρόντιστον. 

dpvyitev. 96. 70 use Phrygian words. Lat. sermonem adhibere 
Phrygium. The reference is to the use of barbarous solecisms. 

φυλακή. 90. Caution, circumspection. Lat. cautio. Cp. φυλάσ- 
cer Oar, δὲ 68, 299. 


20—2 


308 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


gvoixés. 199, 200. Vatural (as opposed to ‘artificial’). Lat. 
naturalis. (In ὃ 231, φυσιολογία = ‘natural philosophy.’) 


φωνήεις. 68,69, 71,177,299. Vocal. Lat. vocalis. τὰ φωνήεντα 
(with or without γράμματα) = vowels. 


φωρᾶν. 180. 70 detect. Lat. deprehendere. Used of the detec- 
tion of metrical phrases in prose composition. 


χαρακτήρ. 395, 36, 59, 72, et passim. Characteristic stamp, type. 
Lat. forma, nota. ‘The word is used in the π. épu. of the four Types 
of Style. Cp. D. & p. 208. 


χάρις. 37, 127. 142, 150, 162, et passim. Charm, wit, pleasantry, 
cleverness, smartness, sprightliness, etc. Lat. venustas, lepor. No 
one English word will quite cover the same ground as χάρις, but its 
meaning is well illustrated by Dionys. Hal. de adm. vi dic. in Dem. 
C. 54 πάσας ἔχουσα Tas ἀρετὰς ἡ Δημοσθένους λέξις λείπεται εὐτραπελίας, 
ἣν οἱ πολλοὶ καλοῦσι χάριν. Cp. χαριεντισμὸς in π. Epp. § 128 6 
γλαφυρὸς λόγος χαριεντισμὸς (΄ βτασθ,᾽ ‘liveliness,’ ‘pleasantry’; ‘the 
privy-nipp, Puttenham) καὶ ἱλαρὸς λόγος ἐστί: a definition which is 
followed by a number of witticisms, such as were collected in ancient 
books of jests (Cic. de Or. li. 54). Dionysius helps again to fix the 
meaning of χαριεντισμός : χαριεντισμὸς yap πᾶς ἐν σπουδῇ καὶ κακοῖς 
γινόμενος ἄωρον πρᾶγμα καὶ πολεμιώτατον ἐλέῳ, de Lsocr. c. 12. In 
§ 141, χαριεντίζεται refers rather to graceful expression than to wit. 
The adv. χαριέντως is found in ὃ 185; the adj. χαρίεις in S§ 132, 133, 
137, etc. On wit in rhetoric, see Volkmann fet. pp. 284—293, 
Sandys Ovator of Cicero pp. 98, 145. 

χλευασμός. 291. Scoffing, satire. Lat. irriszo. 


χορός. 167. Chorus. Lat. chorus. For the ‘conversational 
chorus’ in question, see s.v. διάλογος, p. 274 supra. 


χρεία. 170. Maxim. Lat. praeceptum. Possibly the treatment 
of χρεῖαι which we find in Hermogenes originated, together with 
other προγυμνάσματα, among the rhetoricians of Pergamus. Between 
them, χρεία and γνώμη seem to cover the whole ground of sententious 
philosophy: ‘wise saws and modern instances.’ Cp. Quintil. i. 9, 
3—6, and see S.v. γνώμη, p. 272 supra. 


χρηστοήθεια. 244. Goodness of nature. Lat. imgentum probum. 
Fr. ingénuité. Used with reference to primitive simplicity: cp. 
εὐήθεια. 


GLOSSARY 309 


xoMapBos. 251. A choliambic line. Lat. choliambus. The 
invention of the ‘halting’ iambic line (with a spondee substituted for 
an iambus in the last foot) was attributed to Hipponax: compare 
π. ἕρμ. ὃ 301, and the synonymous term scazon.—The adj. χωλὸς in 
§§ 18, 301. 

ψιλός. 73. Smooth. Lat. lenis. Used of the smooth ‘breathing’ 
(ἦχος). In ὃ 137, the word means ‘bare,’ ‘bald,’ ‘unadorned.’ For 
δασύτης and ψιλότης, cp. Aristot. Poet. c. 20. 


ψόγος. 291, 301. Censure, satire. Lat. vituperatio. 


ψόφος. 95. A sound, a noise. Lat. sonus, strepitus. ψόφος, an 
‘inarticulate sound’ or ‘noise,’ is sometimes contrasted with φωνή 
(‘voice’: also φθόγγος), or with διάλεκτος (‘discourse,’ ‘articulate 
speech’; also Adyos). 


ψυχρότης. 6, 115, 119, 121, 127, 171, 247. rigidity. Lat. 
Jrigus. ‘TYameness’ and ‘tastelessness’ will occasionally serve as 
English renderings. Cp. Aristot. /hez. ill. 3, 7. ὕψ. c. 4. So ψυχρὸς 
(Lat. ‘frigidus,’ ‘insulsus’; Fr. ‘froid’), 88 6, 114, etc. 


ὠδή. 70, 74. Song, melody. Lat. cantus. In ὃ 70, the term is 
applied to words like ἠέλιος which are chiefly composed of vowels 
and so ‘sing themselves.’ Cp. φδικός, ὃ 184. 


Yet Elocution, with the helpe of Mercury, 
The matter exorneth right well facundiously. 


Stephen Hawes, Pasitzme of Pleasure, xi. 1. 


PES eOGw Ney OF DEMEDRIUS DE 
EVOCUMIONE 


AND OF DEMETRIUS PHALEREUS. 


I. ἘΡΙΤΙΟΝΒ AND TRANSLATIONS IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 


Aldus Manutius. Ahetores in hoc Volumine habentur hi. 
Aphthoni Sophistae Progymnasmata. Hermogenis ars Rhetorica. 
Aristotelis Rhetorticorum ad Theodecten libri tres. Liusdem Rhetorice 
ad Alexandrum. Eiusdem ars Poetica. Sopatri Rhetoris guaestiones 
de componendis declamationibus in causis praecipue tudicialibus. Cyrt 
Sophistae differentiae statuum. Dionysti Alicarnase’ ars Rhetorica. 
Demetrit Phaleret de interpretatione. Alexandri Sophistae de figuris 
sensus et dictionis. Adnotationes innominati de figuris Rhetoricis. 
Menandri Rhetoris divisio causarum in genere demonstrativo. Aris- 
terdis de civilt oratione. Liusdem de simplici oratione. Apsinis de arte 
Rhetorica praccepta. Venetits, in aedibus Aldi. 1508, 1509. EDITIO 
PRINCEPS. 


Demetr. Phal. de Interp. is printed in vol. 1, pp. 545-573. This volume was 
published in 1508 ; the second volume in 1500. 


M. Antonius Antimachus. Gemisti Plethonis de gestis Grae- 
corum post pugnam ad Mantineam per capita tractatio, duobus libris 
explicata, M. Antonio Antimacho interprete. Ad haec Dionysii Hali- 
carnassei praecepta de oratione panegyrica, de oratione nuptial, de 
oratione natalitia, de epithalamiis. Demetrit Phaleret praecepta de 
membris et incisis, de periodis, de componendis epistolis, de charactertbus 
dicendt. FPolyaeni de re militari praefatio codem interprete. M. Antonit 


< 


312 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Antimachi de laudibus Graecarum literarum oratio. Omnia nunc 
primum in lucem edita, cum privilegio ad trienntum. Basileae, 1540. 

Of this version Schneider (p. xix. of his edition) says: ‘‘expressit Antimachus 
exemplum Aldinum, sed Latinitate tam rudi et barbara, ut hominem ex Graecia 
cum maxime redeuntem Latine crederes balbutire.”” The censure is not deserved: 
the selections given are well translated and in adequate Latin. 

[Anonymous.]| Δημητρίου Φαληρέως περὶ ἑρμηνείας. Demetrit 
Phatlerei de Elocutione. lorentiae, 1542. 

Petrus Victorius. Δημητρίου Φαληρέως περὶ ἑρμηνείας. De- 
metrit Phaleret de elocutione. Llorentiae, apud Juntas, 1552. 

{It is worth notice that Victorius had edited the etorzc of Aristotle four years 
earlier. | 

[G. Morelius. | Δημητρίου Φαληρέως περὶ ἑρμηνείας. Demetrit 
Phalereit de elocutione. Paristis, 1555. Apud Guil. Morelium, in 
Graecis typographum Regium. 

[Anonymous.] Ἑρμογένης περὶ μεθόδου δεινότητος. Δημητρίου 
Φαληρέως περὶ ἑρμηνείας. ᾿Αριστείδου περὶ πολιτικοῦ λόγου. Hermo- 
gens de gravitate apla etusque tractandi ratione. Demetri Phaleret 
de elocutione. Artstidae de genere dicendi civil. Argentorati, 1556. 

This edition, and that published at Paris in the preceding year, closely follow 
Victorius’ edition of 1552. 

Stanislaus Ilovius. Demetrit Phaleret de Elocutione Liber, 
a Stanislao Llovio Polono Latinitate donatus, et Annotationibus ilus- 
tratus. Item, Dionysu Halicarnasset quaedam Opuscula, eodem inter- 
prete: quae versa pagina recensentur. Adiecimus eadem et Graece, ut 
conferri a studiosis possint. Basileae, per Loannem Oporinum, 1557. 

F. Maslovius. Demetrit Phalerei de elocutione liber a Francisco 
Maslovio Polono in Latinum conversus, et ab eodem obscuriorum Lo- 
corum explicationibus wllustratus.  Patavit, 1557. 

Dasypodius. “Eppoyévous τέχνη ῥητορική, cut adiectus est De- 
metrit Phalere: Liber de Elocutione, item Aristides de generibus dicendt. 
Argentoratt, 1558. 

Petrus Victorius. Petri Victorit Commentarii in librum 
Demetrit Phaleret de Elocutione, positis ante singulas declarationes 
Graecis vocibus Auctoris, usdemgue ad verbum Latine expressis.  Ad- 
ditus est rerum et verborum memorabilium index copiosus. Llorentiae, 
in officina Juntarum, Bernardi Ff, 1562. 


This edition, with its translation and commentary, is on an altogether larger 
scale than the small copy of the text issued by Victorius ten years earlier. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 313 


J. Caselius. Demetrius Phalereus de elocutione, editus nunc 
primum in Germania op. J. Caselit. Rostochit, 1584. 


A Latin translation of the 7. épu., together with notes, is to be found in the 
same editor’s Phalereus stve de Elocutione liber, published at Rostock in 1585. 


Jo. Simonius. Demetrit Phaleret περὶ ἑρμηνείας liber utilis et 
vere aureus, quaestionibus explicatus studio et opera Joannis Simonit, 
Rhetorices in Academia Rostochiensi Professoris publict. _Rostochit, 


τόοι. 


P. Segni. Demetrio Falereo della locuzione volgarizzato da Pier 
SELT2.....- con postille al testo, ed exempli Toscant, conformati @ Grect. 
Firenze, 1603. 


Panigarola. J Predicatore di δὲ Francesco Panig|aroléa...... 
overo Parafrase, Commento, e Discorsi tntorno al libro dell’? Elocutione 
adi Demetrio Falereo. Venetia, 1609. 


An Italian paraphrase, and commentary, on Victorius’ Latin version. 


[Anonymous.] Δημητρίου Φαληρέως περὶ ἑρμηνείας : Demetrit 
Phaleret de Elocutione. Cum Petri Victorit Florentint Latina Inter- 
pretatione. (Degl autori del ben parlare, etc. pt. 2. tom. τ. Venetia, 
1643-) 

[Anonymous.] Oferum Graecorum, Latinorum, et Ttalorum 
rhetorum tomus secundus. Venetits, 1644. 


This volume contains a Greek text and Victorius’ Latin version. 


Thomas Gale. Rhetores Selecti. Demetrius Phalereus, 177- 
berius Rhetor, Anonymus Sophista, Severus Alexandrinus.  Graece 
et Latine. Ed. 7. Gale. Oxonit, 1676. The π. épp. was separately 
reprinted from this edition by Foulis at Glasgow in 1743, with the 
title: Δημητρίου Φαληρέως περὶ “Eppynvetas.  Demetrit Phaleret de 
Llocutione, sive dictione rhetorica. 


Marcello Adriani. Demetrio Falereo della Locuzione tradotto 
dal Greco in Toscano da Marcello Adriano. Firenze, 1738. 


1. F. Fischer. Rhetores selecti. Demetrius Phalereus, Tiberius 
khetor, etc. Lterum edidit, varietatemque lectionis Aldinae adiecit 
Joh. Frider. Fischerus. Lipsiae, 1773. 


This edition is based on Gale’s, whose work is freely criticized in Fischer’s 
Praefatio. 


314 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


J. G. Schneider. Δημητρίου περὶ ἑρμηνείας βιβλίον. Demetri 
de Elocutione liber.  Curavit Johann. Gottlob Schneider. Alten- 
burgl, 1799. 


Ch. Walz. Rhetores Graeci ex codicibus Florentinis Medio- 
lanensibus etc. emendatiores et auctiores edidit, suis aliorumgue anno- 
tationibus instruxit, indices locupletissimos adiecit Christianus Walz. 
Stuttgartiae, 1832-1836. [Text of Δημητρίου περὶ Ἑ) ρμηνείας in 
WOL 6%, [OD τ ΠῚ 


F. Goeller. Demetrit Rhetoris de Elocutione Liber. Edidit 
Franciscus Goeller. Lipsiae, 1837. [Ina note to his Preface p. xxxii. 
Goeller explains how it came about that his edition was issued several 
years after its completion in 1830. | 


L. Spengel. Lhetores Graeci ex recognitione Leonardi Spengel. 
Lipsiae, 1856. [Text of Δημητρίου περὶ “Eppnvefas in vol. 11]. 
pp. 259 ff] 


E. Durassier. Démétrius de Phalere. Del Elocution. Traduit 
du grec en francais avec notes, remarques et table analytique par Edouard 
Durasster. Faris, 1875. 


L. Radermacher. Demetrit Phaleret qui dicitur De Elocutione 
Libellus. Praefatus recensuit adnotavitque Ludovicus Radermacher. 
Lipsiae, 1got. 


II. OccasIoNAL AND PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS IN 
CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 


Bonamy. Jéémoires de Littérature, tirés des Registres de 
2 Académie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, 1773, Vil. 
pp. 157-177. ‘Vie de Démétrius de Phalere, 


Arnaud. Jlémoires de Littérature, tires des Registres de 
2 Académie Royale des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 1774, XXXVil. 
pp. 99-111. ‘Examen de quelques passages des anciens rhéteurs.’ 


Hardion. Aistoire de 1 Académie des Inscriptions et Belles- 
Lettres tirée des Regtstres de cette Académie, 1823, 111. Ὁ. 162. ‘Examen 
dun passage du traité de l’Elocution attribué ἃ Démétrius de 
Phalere.’ 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 315 


H. Dohrn. Commentatio historica de vita et rebus Demetrit 
Phatlerei, philosophi peripatetict. Kiliae, 1825. 

H. W. Grauert. De vita et rebus Demetrit Phaleret.  Kiliae, 
1825. 

C. E. Finckh. Weue Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie und Padagogik, 
1838, xxll. pp. 291-303. ‘Demetrius de Elocutione, ed. Gdller.’ 

C. E. Finckh. Obdservationes criticae in Demetrit rhetoris de 
elocutione libellum.  Heilbronnae, 1841. 


C. E. Finckh. 75 Longini artem rhetoricam et in Demetrit 
libellum de elocutione annotationes criticae. Heilbronnae, 1847. 


Chr. Ostermann. De Demetrit Phalerei vita, rebus gestis et 
scriptorum religuits. HHersfeld 1847; Fulda 1857. 


A. Nauck. Rheinisches Museum, 1848, vi. p. 469. ‘Mis- 
cellen.’ 


Th. Herwig. De Demetrit Phaleret Scriptis. Rinteln, 1850. 


5. J. Legrand et F. Tychon. Mémoire couronné par 
2 Académie Royale des Sciences, des Lettres et des Beaux-Arts de 
Belgique sur Démétrius de Phalere, considéré comme orateur, homme 
@ état, érudit et philosophe. Lruxelles,1852. (Mémoires couronnes ete., 
XXIV. pp. I-1g0.) 

H. Weil. ewe Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie und Pidagogik, 1856, 
Ixxll. pp. 704-706. ‘Zu Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας." 

C. E. Finckh. Pyilologus, 1860, xv. pp. 153, 154. ‘Zu De- 
metrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας, § 213. 

H. Usener. Rheinisches Museum, 1868, xxill. p. 336. 
‘Callone.’ 

C. Hammer. PAzlologus, 1876, xxxv. pp. 711-713. ‘ Kritische 
Beitrage zu Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας." 


C. Hammer. /Pilologus, 1876, xxxvi. pp. 355-358. ‘ Krit- 
ische Beitrége zu Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας." 

H. Liers. De aetate et scriptore libri qui fertur Demetrii 
Phalerei περὶ “Eppnvetas. Vvratislaviae, 188t. 

C.G. Cobet. Mnemosyne N. S., 1882, x. p. 42. ‘ De locis 


nonnullis apud Graecos epistolarum scriptores.’ (Cp. Cobet, Col 
lectanea Critica, pp. 236, 237.) 


316 DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


H. Schenkl. Wiener Studien, 1882, iv. pp. 55-76. ‘Zur 
Kritik der Schrift des Demetrios περὶ “Eppunvetas.’ 


C. Hammer. Demetrius περὶ “Eppnvetas. Ein literar-histort- 
scher Versuch. Landshut, 1883. 


H. Liers. Neue Jahrbiicher fiir Philologie und Padagogtk, 1887, 
CXXXV. pp. 681-717. ‘Zur Geschichte der Stilarten.’ 


A. Altschul. De Demetri Rhetoris Acetate. Lipsiae, 18809. 


F. Beheim-Schwarzbach. vbellus περὶ ἑρμηνείας gui De- 
metrit nomine inscriptus est quo tempore compositus sit. Kiliae, 1890. 


Papasis. Demetrius Phalereus und die Stadt Athen. Erlangen, 
1893. 
K. Dahl. Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας. Lin Beitrag zur Bestim- 


mung der Abfassungszeit der Schrift. Zweibriicken; Part τ. 1894, 
Part τι. 1895. 


W. Schmid, Lhetnisches Museum, 1894, xlix. p. 144. ‘Zur 
antiken Stillehre.’ 


5. Roshdestwenski. Χαριστήρια: Moscow, 1896, pp. 361— 
370. ‘His τὸ Δημητρίου τοῦ Φαληρέως καλούμενον βιβλίον περὶ ἑρμη- 
velas σύμβολα. 


G. Ammon. ASlatter fiir bayr. Gymnasialschulwesen, 18098, 
Xxxlv. pp. 729-736. ‘Zu Demetrius περὶ ἑρμηνείας, besonders seine 
Sprache im Lichte der Ciceronianischen Korrespondenz.’ 


U. v. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff. Hermes, 1899, xxxiv. 
p» 629; “ Wesefruchte: 


W. Rhys Roberts. Classical Review, 1901, xv. pp. 252-255. 
“The Greek Words for Szy/e: with special reference to Demetrius 
περὶ Eppnvetas.’ 


W. Rhys Roberts. Classical Review, 1901, xv. pp. 453, 454. 
‘Milton and Demetrius de Elocutione.’ . 


ENOTES: 


I. INDEX OF NAMES AND MATTERS. 


References are made to the 7. épu. itself by sections; to the introduction, 


notes and glossary by pages. 


Accusative Case. Greek term, § 201, 
p- 263. Case-termination (3rd decl.) 
in τὴν or -7, § 175, Ρ- 242 

Acting. Remarks on, §§ 193—195 

Aeschines (the Orator), §§ 267, 268. 
Cp. Index II. 

Aeschines Socraticus, §$ 205, 
297, p- 257- Cp. Index II. 

Affectation. Affectation (κακοζηλία), the 
distorted variety of the elegant style, 
strives after effect in the thought itself 
(ξξ 187, 239), in the expression (§§ 188, 
247), in the use of anapaestic rhythms 
(§ 189). Cp. pp. 55, 286, 294 

Agathon, pp. 5, 41, 287 

Ajax. A ‘smooth’ (euphonious) word 
in its Greek form Αἴας, § 176 

Aleaeus. See Index II. 

Alcidamas, §§ 12, 116, p. 233 

Aldus. Aldus Manutius issued the 
editio princeps of the 7. épu. (as part 
of his Rhefores) in 1508, p. 311 

Alexander. A conceit, or pun, ad- 
dressed to him, § 187. Aristotle’s 
letters to Alexander, § 234. Dema- 
dean references to him, §§ 283, 284 

Alexandria and rhetoric, p. 18. The 
π. €pu. and Alexandria, pp. 62, 63, 
225, 246 

Allegory. Its impressiveness, 88. 99, 
100, 243; its liability to abuse, ὃ 102; 


201, 


its allusiveness, § 151. Cp. pp. 213, 
264 
Amazons. A succinct description of a 


sleeping Amazon, § 138, p. 236 
Ambiguity. Must be avoided in the 
plain style, § 196. Cp. p. 265 
Ammonius, the son of Hermeias; ap- 
parently mentions the 7. épu., p. 60 
Anacreon. His short and jerky lines 
not appropriate to grave themes, § 5 
Anapaest. Anapaestic rhythms are 
sometimes used affectedly in prose 

composition, § 189 

Anaphora. Repetition of a word in 
successive clauses, §§ 141, 268. Cp. 
Ρ. 266 

Anaximenes supposed author of the 
Rhetorica ad Alexandrum, p. ΤΙ 


‘Ancients.’ Characteristics of their 
style, §§ 14, 244. See also pp. 53, 
224, 269 


Annoon. A word whose pleasing sound 
is due to the double consonant, § 174 

Antiphon. The happy negligence he 
shows in using μέν repeatedly, δέ 
only once, § 53. Cp. Index II. and 
pp- 6, 7 

Antisthenes, § 249, pp- 20, 253 

Antithesis, § 24, etc. (full references 
given on p. 266 supra). Antithesis 
and antithetic periods impair force, 


318 


§$ 247, 250. Example of false anti- 


thesis, § 24, p. 216 


Apophthegms. Should be pithily put, 
§ 9. Cp. p. 269 

Aposiopesis. The figure of ‘sudden 
reticence,’ §§ 103, 264. Cp. pp. 268, 
269 

Archedemus. | Improves on the Aristo- 


telian definition of the period, § 34. 
See pp. 218, 243 
Archilochus, § 5. Cp. Index II. 
Architect § or. 
Given as an example of a word 


(‘ master-builder ’), 


happily compounded 
Arid style. The defective counterpart 
of the plain style, §§ 236—238, p. 294 
Aristeides, § 238. (Examples of the 


kind here given savour of the rhetori-- 


cal practice-schools: cp. the refer- 
ences to the Cyclops, § 115, Ephor, 
§ 122, Centaur, § 187, Olympias, 
§ 187.) 

Aristippus and Cleombrotus. The 
gentle irony with which Plato in the 
Phaedo reproaches them for their 
absence from the side of their im- 
prisoned master Socrates, § 288 (‘for 
they were in Aegina’). For Aristip- 
pus, see also p. 258 supra 

Aristophanes, §§ 150, 152, 161. See 
Index 11. and pp. 5 n. 2, 13 n. 2 

Aristotle. To the references given 
under Aristotle’s name in Index II. 
should be added §§ 41, 116, 234. 
The actual quotations from (ez. 11]. 
in the 7. ἑρμ. give but a faint idea of 
the influence of the former upon the 
latter. See also pp. 14—16, 35—39, 
50—52, 200, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 
et passim. For Aristotle and pro- 
verbs, cp. pp. 260, 261 

Arnold, Matthew. His poetry quoted, 
PP: 303, 304 

Art. Analogies drawn from various 
arts by Greek rhetoricians, 88. 13, 14, 
Ῥ- 218 

Artemon. Editor οἵ Aristotle’s Letters: 


DEMETRITS ON STYLE 


his comparison of a letter to one side 
of a dialogue, ὃ 223, p. 249 

Article. Correspondence of article to 
article, § 23. Cp. p. 269 

Asyndeton. Its use and abuse, ὃ8 192— 
194. See also pp. 270 (ἀσύνδετον), 
274 (διαλύειν), 291 (Aves) 

Attic. The Attic dialect: its pungency 
and other qualities, ὃ 177. The 
‘ Attic’ writers (a designation which is 
perhaps a mark of late date), § 175, 


p- 241. Specifically Attic words in 
the m. épu., p. 57; cp. the Notes 
passim 


Atticism and Asianism, pp. 45—49 

Authorised Version of the Bible. 1]- 
lustrative passages quoted from, pp. 
219, 247, 260, 265, 267, 276, 288, 
303) 304 

Authorship of the De Llocutione, pp. 
49 ff. 


Bombast. Its dangers illustrated, 88 121, 
304 

‘Breaking the news.’ An example of 
Ctesias’ delicacy of feeling, § 216 

Breathings. Rough and smooth breath- 
ings, § 73, PP- 273, 284, 309 

Brevity (conciseness). A great aid to 
vigour and impressiveness of style, 
88. 7, 103, 137, 253. Cp. pp- 271, 272 

Broken rhythm. Its use and abuse, 
δὲ 6, 238, 239- 
κοπή 

Browning. Quoted in the introduction, 
p- 44, and the notes, p. 248. See 
also p. 201 

Bulias. A character in a mime of 
Sophron, § 153 

Byron. Quoted in the Notes and Glos- 
sary, pp. 238, 300 


Cp. p. 268 s.v. ἀπο- 


Cacophony. May minister to vividness 
and force of style, §§ 219, 255. Cp. 
pp. 286, 287 

Cadences. Cp. references given on p. 
268, s.v. ἀπόθεσις 


LZ. INDEX OF NAMES AND MATTERS 


Caecilius of Calacte, p. 20 

Caesar, Julius. His study of language, 
pp: 260, 298 

Callistratus, ὃ 174: see s.n. Anzoon 
supra 

Cases. Monotony to be avoided in the 
use of cases, ὃ 65, p. 224. The use of 
oblique cases and constructions may 
be effective (§ 104), but may also lead 
to obscurity (§ 198). Nominative 
and accusative cases, 88. 198, 201, pp. 
263, 283, 295, 300 

Chesterfield, Lord. His aversion to 
proverbs, p. 259 


Choliambics. Choliambic lines are 
forcible, §§ 251, 301. Cp. pp. 285, 
399 

Chrysippus. Apparently followed in 


ΝΠ (Cs Ds 211 
Chrysostom. Quoted, pp. 294, 295 
Cicala. Proverbial and figurative ex- 
pression concerning the cicata, §§ 99, 


243 

Cicero. His rhetorical standpoint, pp. 
24, 25. Quoted in the Notes and 
Glossary, passim 

Clearness. Lucidity is a prime essen- 
tial of the plain style, §§ 191 ff. For 
lucidity in general, cp. pp. 37, 38, 
246, 265, 301 

Cleitarchus. An example of bombast 
quoted from him, § 304. Cp. p. 259 

Clematis. ‘Egyptian clematis’ used as 
a sobriquet for a dark and lanky 
"person, ὃ 172 

Cleobulina. See ὃ 102, p. 231 

Cleon. Referred to as a notorious 
Athenian demagogue, § 294 

Cleophon. Mentioned together with 
Cleon, § 294 

Climax. The figure so called, ὃ 270, 
ῬΡ- 255, 288 

Comedy. Its alliance with mirth and 
charm, § 169. The employment of 
the trimeter by the New Comedy, 
§ 204. Allusion to ‘New Comedy’: its 
bearing on date of treatise, pp. 53, 246 


319 


Comparative and Superlative. For 
their use in later Greek see p. 237, 
and cp. § 146 

Composition. The 
(which corresponds to ‘composition’ 
in its stricter sense) occurs very fre- 
quently in the treatise: §$§ 4, 8, 9, 11, 
30, 31, 38, 40, 43, 45, 48, 49, 58, 68, 
74, 92, 117, 121, 179, 180, 186, 189, 
204, 221, 237, 239, 241, 246, 248, 
299, 301, 303. Cp. p. 305 

Conjunctions (connectzves). Their mul- 
tiplication is an effective aid to style, 
δδ 54, 63, pp. 303, 304. Their 
absence may cause obscurity, ὃ 192 

Corax as a teacher of rhetoric, pp. 1, 2 

Cornificius the supposed author of the 
Rhetorica ad Herenntum, Ὁ. 24 

Correctness of style. References s.v. 
ἀκρίβεια, p. 264 

Craterus. One of Alexander’s generals, 
rebuked by Demetrius Phalereus ‘in 
a figure,’ § 289 

Crates, §§ 170, 259, pp. 240, 254 

Ctesias, 88. 212—216, p. 247. Cp. D.Z. 
p- 13 

Cupping-glass. A riddling description 
of, ὃ 102 

Cyclops. 
unexpected guest-gift, §§ 130, 152, 262 

Cynics. The ‘Cynic manner’ is dis- 
tinguished by its mordant wit, §§ 
259—261 


word σύνθεσις 


The grim pleasantry of his 


Date of the De Llocutione, pp. 49 ff., 
and Notes and Glossary passim 

Demades. His highly figurative say- 
ings, §§ 283—286, pp. 53, 256 

Demetrius of Alexandria. Possibly the 
author of 7. épu., p. 63 

Demetrius of Phalerum. Mentioned 
by name in § 289. See also pp. 17, 
18, 52, 62, 257, 311 ff. 

Demosthenes. Mentioned or quoted in 
the following sections: I0, 11, 20, 
31, 80, 245, 246, 248, 250, 253, 263, 
268—273, 277—280, 299. It is to 


320 


be noticed that most of the references 
to Demosthenes occur in the later 
sections, those which deal with δεινό- 
Tns. For references to the passages 
quoted, see Index II. Cp. pp. 11, 12 
Dialogue. Resemblance, and difference, 
between a dialogue and a letter, §$ 
223, 224, Ὁ. 274 
Dicaearchus, § 182, p. 242 
Digamma. Possible allusion to, § 255. 
Cp. pp. 253, 286 
Diogenes, δὲ 260, 261. 
containing 


(Some papyrus- 

fragments sayings of 
Diogenes have been published, since 
the completion of this edition, by 
Wessely in Lestschrift Theodor Gom- 
pera.) 

Dionysius the Younger, δὲ 8, 9, 99, 100, 

The proverb ‘Dionysius 

refers to the 


102, 200. 

at Corinth’ clearly 

younger Dionysius; and so probably 

the threat addressed to the 
Locrians. In § 292 also, he may be 
meant rather than his father 

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, pp. 20—23, 
42, 45, 63, 218, 242; etc. 

Diphthongs. The concurrence of diph- 
thongs produces elevation (§ 73), but 
should be avoided in the plain style 
(§ 207) 

Dithyrambic compounds. To beavoid- 
ed, §§ οἵ, 116: cp. § 143 

Doric dialect. Its broad sounds, § 177, 
Ῥ- 242 

Double augment, pp. 210, 245 

Double compounds. To be avoided, 
ὃ 93, Ρ- 229 

Double oo and double tt. Both forms 
found side by side in the π. ἑρμ., 
pp: 58, 222 

Dryden, John. 

Dual number. 


π. ἑρμ.» p» 58 


does 


His Essays, p. 303 
Its occurrence in the 


Egypt. The priests in Egypt employ 
the seven vowels in their hymns to 
the gods, § 71, pp. 224, 225 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Elegant style, §§ 128—189, pp. 29, 30, 
33, etc. 

‘Elephanteer’ (€\epavtioT7s). 
coined by Aristotle, § 97 
Elevated style, §§ 36—127, pp. 29, 

33, 39, 218, 292, etc. 

“Elocution.’ Obsolete in English as 
applied to rhetorical style: but cp. 
the Latin, French and Italian terms 
given on p. 282, s.v. ἑρμηνεία. (The 
passage of Stephen Hawes quoted 
on p. 310 provides an example of the 
older use of ‘ elocution,’ and suggests 
the supposed connexion between ép- 
μηνεία and Ἑρμῆς. With ‘facundi- 
ously,’ cp. λόγιος on p. 290 supra.) 


A word 


Empedocles. The father of Rhetoric, 
p- I 
Enthymeme. The distinction between 


the enthymeme and the period, 88 
30—33- Cp. pp. 279) 291, 292 
Epanalepsis, § 196, p. 280 
Epanaphora, S§§ 61, 268, p. 280 
Epicharmus, § 24, p. 216. Cp. Index 
Il. 
Epicureans and rhetoric, pp. 19, 20. 
Epicurus as a letter-writer, p. 250 
Epimone. Defined, and effect on style 
described, § 280, p. 281 

Epiphonema. Defined and illustrated, 
§§ 106—111, p. 281 

Epistolary style. Relation between 
letter and dialogue; the letter as a 
revelation of character; the length, 
structure, topics of a letter: §§ 223 
ππ 295» Ps 249 

Epithets. Their use and abuse, §§ 85, 
116. Cp. p. 280 

Erasmus. The proverb ‘omnis herus 
servo monosyllabus’ in his Adagia, 
p- 213. Erasmus as a letter-writer, 
D> ὅτ 

Euphemism. Defined, and illustrated 
from the incident of the golden 
Victories, § 281, pp. 256, 283 

Euphony. Practice of Isocrates de- 
scribed and a middle course advised, 


I. INDEX OF NAMES AND MATTERS 


§ 68. Common parlance, § 69. 
Poetical forms, § 70. Priests in 
Egypt, ὃ 71. Attic writers, § 175. 


Cp. pp. 283, 284, 302 
Euripides. His use of expletives, § 58 ; 
the opportunities he affords to the 
actor who takes the part of Ion in 
his play of that name, § 195 
Expletives. The employment of ex- 
pletive particles, §§ 55—58, p. 296 
Fables. Sometimes form an attractive 
element in writing, 88 157, 158 
Figures. Must not be used in excess, 
$ 67. Peculiar figures should be 
avoided in the plain style, § 208. 
to force, 


Cp. pp- 


contribute 
281. 


Figures will 
δὲ 263—271, 
305, 306 

Finish of style. References 5. v. ἀκρί- 
Bea, p. 264 supra 


Forcible style, δὲ 240—304, pp. 31» 


280, 


34, etc. 

Frigidity of style. How caused, 
88 114-121. Cp. pp. 232, 233, 
309 


Gadarene : see under 7heodorus, p. 325 
infra 

Gelo. Described as a father and edu- 
cator of Sicily, § 292 

‘Genitive absolute.’ Used for the 
sake of variety, § 65, p- 224 

Giraldus Cambrensis. On the decline 
of letters in England, p. 45 

Gorgias. His periods and antitheses, 
S$ 12, 15, 29- Cp. pp. 2—5, 47, 48, 
233, 234 

Graces (or ornaments) of style. 
pression, arrangement, figures, etc., 
contribute to grace of style, §§ 
136—156 

Grand style: see references 5. v. ‘ele- 
vated,’ p. 320 supra 

Gregorius Corinthius. Metropolitan 
of Corinth and =choliast on Hermo- 
genes, pp. 61, 214, 222, 223, etc, 


Com- 


R. 


321 

Griphus, i.e. mystification, § 153, 
Ρ- 273 

Hearer. Often found where modern 


writers would use ‘ reader,’ p. 264 


Hecataeus. Example of detached 
clauses from Hecataeus, § 12. Cp. 
§ 2, p. 212 

Hegesias. His jerky style, p. 20 

Heine. Quoted in Notes, p. 252 

Heracleitus. Chief reason of his ob- 
scurity, § 192, p. 244 

Hermagoras. Elaborates a system of 


rhetoric, p. 21 

Hermogenes and the varieties of style, 
Pe By 

Herodotus, ὃ8 12, 17, etc. 
224, 275, and Index II. 

‘Heroic.’ As a metrical term, §§ 5, 
42, p. 284 

Hesiod. Possibly referred to in § 122: 
cp. p. 26t 

Hexameter. The hexameter, as the 
longest of Greek poetical measures, 
is suited to heroic themes, §§ 4, 5. 
Cp. Ρ 278 

Hiatus. See references given under 
σύγκρουσις on p. 302 supra, and 

‘“Euphony’ 
Also, p. 303 supra under συναλοιφή 

Hiero. Mentioned, together with Gelo, 
in 292 

Hippias and prosody, p. 5 

Hippocrates. Quoted to show the 
drawbacks of a jerky style, §§ 4, 
258: | Cpy pps 20251257, 

Hipponax. How and why Hipponax 
invented the choliambic metre, § 301. 
Cp. p- 309, § 132 

History and poetry, § 215, p. 247 

Homer. Quoted throughout the trea- 
tise, and more frequently than any 
other writer: cp. Index II. (Like 
other rhetoricians, the author of the 
mw. é€pu. draws as freely from the 
poets as from prose-writers, clearly 
believing that the study of poetic 


Cp. pp. 


under in this Index. 


21 


322 


style should help, rather than injure, 
the study of prose style: cp. p. 219 


supra.) See also pp. 213, 219, 221, 
222, 225, etc. 
Homoeoteleuta. Their character and 


their dangers, §§ 26—28; cp. p. 295. 
For the connexion between homoeo- 
teleuton and modern rhyme, cp. p. 48 

Horace and the Avs Poetica, p. 25 

Humour. Some of the examples in 
§§ 128 ff. may be classified under 
this head, or perhaps rather under 
that of Wit, q. v. 

Hypallage. For this figure, under the 
name ἀνθυπαλλαγή, cp. ὃ 60, p. 266 
Hyperbole. May be employed, in 
comedy and elsewhere, as an orna- 
ment of style, §§ 161, 162. But there 
is danger of abuse, §§ 124 ff. Cp. 


Ρ- 307 


Iambus. The iambic measure re- 
sembles ordinary conversation, and 
many people talk iambics without 
knowing it, § 43, p. 220 

Imagery. Poetical imagery to be 
avoided in prose, §§ 89, 90; in the 
forcible style especially, § 274 

Imitation. 
the full rhetorical sense, hardly occurs 


‘Imitation’ (μίμησις), in 


in the 7. ἑρμ- : cp. pp. 21 ff., 294 

Infinitive. Used for imperative: see 
p- 220, where a list of instances 
found in the 7. épu. is given 

Interrogation. To put a question to 
an audience in such a way that it 
admits of only one answer is more 
effective than a direct assertion, § 
279 

Inversion of words in the 7. ἑρμ., 
PP: 59; 234 

Ion. The young Ion in the play of 
Euripides, § 195, p. 244 

Irony. An excellent example from the 
Phaedo, § 288. Cp. p. 277 

Isocolon. Equality of syllables in al- 
ternate members, § 25, p. 285 


DEMETREOS SON 5ΖΎΖΕ 


Isocrates. His periodic writing, § 12. 
The avoidance of hiatus by him and 
his followers, §§ 68, 299: cp. Quin- 
tilian’s estimate of Isocrates (7722. 
Or. X. τ, 79), concluding with the 
words ‘‘in compositione adeo diligens 
ut cura eius reprehendatur.”’ Cp. 
Index II. and pp. 8—11, 47, 48, 216 


Jests contrary to Expectation, § 152 
(ἡ παρὰ τὴν προσδοκίαν χάρις), p. 300 

Johnson, Samuel. Quoted in the notes, 
Pp: 220, 233 

Jonson, Ben. Quoted, p. 223 


Keats. Quoted, p. 224 
Knox, John. Quoted, p. 292 


Lacedaemonians. Their love of brevity 
in speech illustrated, and its vigo- 
rous effect indicated, §§ 7, 8, 241, 
242 

Late words and forms in the 7. épy.: 
see lists in Introduction pp. 56 ff., 
and cp. Notes and Glossary passim 

Laticlave. Supposed allusion to, § 108, 
PP: 53) 54, 232 

Laudando praecipere. This maxim 
anticipated, § 295, p. 258 

Lawgiver (vouoférns). Cited as a 
model of a compound word, § gt 

Lincoln, Abraham. His use of pro- 
verbs, p. 260 

‘Longinus.’ His attitude towards style 
and imitation, pp. 25—27 

Lucidity. See ‘clearness,’ p. 319 supra 


Lysias. The exemplar of the plain 
style, ὃ 190. His wit and sarcasm, 
§§ 128, 262. Cp. Index II. and pp. 


7, 8, 216, 217, 255 


Macaulay. His style from various 
points of view, pp. 215, 239, 267 

Manuscripts of the De Elocutione, pp. 
209—211 : 

Maxims. Their nature and use, 88 9, 


110, 170, pp. 272, 273, 308 


I. INDEX OF NAMES AND MATTERS 


‘Member’ (κῶλον). Definition from 
Aristotle and Archedemus, ὃ 34. 
Origin and use, §§ 1—7. Cp. p. 289 

Menander. His‘ Woman of Messenia,’ 


§ 153. Why he is popular with the 
actor, $$ 194, 195. Cp. pp. 53, 
239 

Metaphor. Contributes to elevation of 


style, when used with discrimination, 
§ 78. Convertible and non-convert- 
ible metaphors, §§ 78, 79. The ex- 
pansion of metaphor into simile, 
§§ 80, 89. So-called ‘active,’ or 
‘vivid,’ metaphors, § 81. Effective 
and ineffective use of metaphor, 
§§ 82, 83, 84. Metaphors 
guarded, § 85. Usage the true guide, 


safe- 


§§ 86, 87. Frigidity due to misuse 
of metaphors, § 116. Cp. pp. 226, 
293 

Milton: pp. 44, 51, 224, 253, 264; 
287 


‘Mirth amid tears.’ The rueful laugh- 
ter caused by over-elaborate style, 
§ 28, p. 288 

Music. Kinds of words distinguished 
by musicians, § 176. Verbal music, 
88. 69—72, 174, 184, 185 

Mysteries. Their allegorical (symboli- 
cal, figurative) character, § ror 


Naiveté. Characteristic of old-fashion- 
ed style, § 244, p. 268 

Natural expression. 
88 27, 28, 300 

Nicias. The painter Nicias and the 
importance of a right choice of sub- 
ject, § 76, p. 226 

Nireus. Homer, by employing figures, 
exalts Nireus, §§ 61, 62 


Its effectiveness, 


Obscurity. Paradoxical, but true, that 
obscurity sometimes contributes to 
force, § 254, p- 253 

Onomatopoeic Words. Defined, § 94. 
Add to vividness, § 220. Cp. p. 297 


323 


Paeon. The two kinds of paeon and 
their use in elevated discourse, §§ 
38—41. Cp. p. 296 

Parallelism of clauses. 
p- 260 

Paris Manuscript, No. 1741, contain- 
ing the De EZlocutione, Aristotle’s 
Rhetoric and Poetics, etc., pp. 209, 


§§ 23, 250; 


210, 219 

Parody. An instance, ὃ I50. Cp. 
jb 1 wo 2 

Particles. Their use and abuse, $$ 


55—58. A happy negligence in their 
use, ὃ 53 

Parts of speech. List of those men- 
tioned in the 7m. épu., p. 269 5. v. 
ἄρθρον 

Passion. Should be characterised by 
simplicity and naturalness, § 28. 
See p. 267 (ἀπάθεια) and p. 295 
(πάθος) for various references 

Pergamus and rhetoric, p. 19 

Period. Definition and description, 
§§ ro ff. Number and length of 
members in a period, 88 16—18. 
Simple and composite periods, §§ 17, 
18. The historical, conversational 
and rhetorical period, §§ 109-21. An- 
tithetic periods, §§ 22—24. Excessive 
use of periods, 88 12, 303. Judicious 
combination of periodic and running 
styles, § 15. Contrast between the 
two styles, § 244, p. 287.—For 
periods in the New Testament, cp. 
p- 26 n. 3.—See also p. 298 

Peripatetics. Referred to as writers 
possessing common characteristics, 
§ 181, pp. 18, 53 

Personification. Examples in §§ 265, 
266, 285, p. 300 


Pheidias. The characteristics of his 
sculpture, § 14 
Philemon. His style contrasted with 


that of Menander, § 193, pp. 53 
244 

Philip of Macedon. Why he could not 
bear to hear the Cyclops mentioned, 


324 


§ 293: cp. references under ‘tyrants,’ 
P- 326 infra 

Philistus. How his obscurity arises, 
§ 198. Cp. p. 245 

Phillips, Stephen. Quoted on p. 252 

Philodemus and rhetoric, pp. 19, 60, 
218 

‘Phrase’ (κόμμα). Definition, § το. 
Phrases, rather than members, con- 
duce to force of style, § 241; but 
they may also cause aridity, § 238. 
Cp. p. 288 

Plain style, $§ 199-239, pp- 30, 34, etc. 

Plato. References to Plato will be 
found in the sections enumerated in 
Index II. and also in §§ 37, 80, 
181, 228, 234,297. Cp. pp. 12—14, 
227, 261, etc. 

Plural. Neuter plural with singular 
verb, pp. 214, 217, 230, 252 

Poetry. Rarely written in measures of 
greater length than six feet, § 4. 
Poetic diction in prose must be used 
with discretion, §§ 112, 113 

Polybius. His use of proverbs, p. 261 

Polycrates. A rhetorician mentioned 
in § 120. Cp. p. 234 

Polysyndeton. The term itself does 
not occur in the 7m. épu., but see 
ΡΡ' 393» 3904 

Pope, Alexander, pp. 225, 233, 234, 
etc. 

Praetermission. A figure which makes 
a show of passing over points which 
are really stated, § 263, p. 296 

Praxiphanes. On the use of particles, 
8. 57: Ορ᾿ ΒΡ 221, 222 

‘Principle of Suspense.’ See p. 216 

Prodicus. His study of etymology and 
synonyms, p. 5 

Pronunciation of the letter v, p. 224 

Protagoras and grammar, p. 5 

Proverbs. The proverbs occurring in 
the m. épu. are collected on pp. 259 
—262 supra 


Quintilian as a student of style, pp. 25, 


DEMETRIUS ON STVLE 


44. Quoted in the Notes and Glos- 
sary passim 

Quotations. Often loosely made in 
the π. épu.: cp. p. 213 


Recantation. As a rhetorical figure, 
ὃ 148, p. 293 


‘Redouble.’ Puttenham’s term for dva- 
δίπλωσις, p. 265 
Redundancy. Illustrated in § 58. Cp. 


pp: 296, 298 

Repetition. Words repeated for effect, 
88 61, 62, 211—214, 267; or for 
clearness, §§ 196, 197. Cp. pp. 265, 
266, 275, 276, 280 

Reticence. See under ‘aposiopesis,’ 
p- 318 supra 

Rhetoric of Aristotle, pp. 14—16, 36— 
40, 50, 51, 209, et passim. Cp. 
Index II. s. n. Aristotle 

Rhetorica ad Alexandrum. Its author- 
ship and character, pp. 11, 59 

Rhetorical terms not found in the 
π. ἐρμ. Some of these given on 
pp: 268, 286 

Rhythm. Points of rhythm are raised 
in ὃ8 5, 6, 42, 48, 117, 183, 184, 
301, et passim. Cp. pp. 40 ff., 271, 
283, 301 etc. 


Riddle. Language may become a 
riddle, § τοῦ. Cp. pp. 263, 273 
‘Risky.’ The word κινδυνώδης is used 


of daring experiments in the use of 
language, as in § 80. Cp. pp. 270 
(ἀσφαλής), 281 (ertopadns), 287 (κιν- 
δυνώδη5) 


Sappho. Cp. Index 11. and add $§ 132, 


166, 167 

Satyric drama. Mentioned in § 169. 
Cp. p. 240 

Scazon. See references under ‘ choli- 


ambics,’ p. 319 supra 

Scythians. The words ἀπὸ Σκυθῶν 
ῥῆσις were used proverbially for azs- 
cours ἃ la scythe, Gothic bluntness, 
§$ 216, 297. Cp. pp. 262, 300 


I. INDEX OF NAMES AND MATTERS 


‘Shake.’ As a musical term, § 74, 
Pp- 225 
Shakespeare: pp. 41, 44, 223, 235, 


236, 237, 288 
Sheridan. Quoted, p. 227 


Sicily. The birthplace of rhetoric, 
§ 1 
Simile. Expanded metaphor, §§ 80, 


89. Cp. p- 277 


Socrates. The Socratic Dialogues: 
‘their method and their success, 
§§$ 297, 298 

Sophists. Their contributions to the 


study of prose style, pp. 5, 6 

Sophocles. A bombastic line attributed 
to Sophocles, ὃ 114, p. 232. Cp. 
PP- 44, 222, 261 

Sophron. See references in Index II. 
together with 88 128, 153 and pp. 234, 
235, 261 

Sotades. The character of the Sotadean 
measures, § 189, p. 244 

Sounds. Effects produced by the use 
of harsh or sweet sounds, §§ 48, 49, 
69, 70, 105, 219, 255. Cp. pp. 283, 
284, 286 

Spencer, Herbert. His philosophical 
treatise on Style, p. 43 

‘Spheterize.’ Used by Sir William 
Jones in imitation of the Greek, 
Pp: 255, 256. Cp. ὃ 278 

Stesichorus. A proverbial expression 
ascribed by Aristotle to Stesichorus, 
§§ 99, 243. Cp. p. 260 n. I 

Stevenson, Robert Louis. His literary 
essay on Style, p. 43 

Stoics and rhetoric, p. 19 

Style. See the references under ‘ele- 
vated,’ ‘elegant,’ ‘forcible,’ ‘plain,’ 
‘arid,’ ‘epistolary,’ etc., as well as 
the Introduction, Notes and Glossary, 
passim.—Among the many anticipa- 
tions of what are sometimes sup- 
posed to be modern views of style, 
may be mentioned: (a) Distinction 
of style shown (according to Theo- 
phrastus) as much in what is omitted 


325 


as in what is said, § 222; (4) ‘Le 
style est Vhomme méme’: this es- 
pecially true of the epistolary style, 
§ 227, p. 250. As to the Greek 
words for ‘style,’ see pp. 32, 267, 
282, 290, 307 

Subjunctive. Used with εἰ, 88 76, 269, 
Ρ. 226 

Substance and Form in Greek critical 
literature, pp. 34 ff. 

Summary of the 7. épu., pp. 28—34 

Swinburne. Quoted, pp. 227, 233, 275 

Syllables. Impressive effect of long 
syllables at the beginning and the 
end of a member, ὃ 39, p- 219 

Syllogism. The enthymeme distin- 
guished from the syllogism, ὃ 32, 
Ρ- 302 

Symbolical language. 
legory,’ p. 317 supra 


See under ‘al- 


Symmetry. Its use and abuse, §§ 25, 
29, 53 

Synaloepha. The fusion of vowels, 
ὃ. 70, Ρ- 303 


Syrianus: refers to ‘ Demetrius,’ p. 61 


Taste. Want of taste, how shown: 
§§ 67, 171, pp. 265, 268 

Telauges. Title of a dialogue of Ae- 
schines Socraticus, ὃ 291, p. 257: 
cp. ὃ 170, Ρ- 240 

Teleboas. Xenophon, in speaking of 
the small river Teleboas, suits his 
language to the theme, §§ 6, 121 

Tennyson: pp. 44, 220, 221, 223, 227, 
230, 231, etc. 

Tense. The use of the past tense may 
contribute to vividness, § 214 

Text of the 7. épu. 
pp. 209—2II supra 

Theodorus. Theodorus of Gadara pro- 
bably meant in § 237: cp. pp. 21, 
54, 251 

Theognis. The use by Theognis of 
the expression ‘stringless lyre’ for 
a bow, § 85. Cp. Index II. 

Theophrastus. See the 


See note on 


references 


21—3 


326 


given in Index II. 
51, etc. 

‘Theophylact. His reference to the 7. 
ἑρμ., pp- 60, 61 

Theopompus. Cp. Index II. and see 
also §§ 75, 240, 250, p. 217 

‘Thrasymachus and the period, pp. 5, 6 

Thucydides. See Index II. and also 
§§ 40, 49, 181, 228. ΟΡ. pp. 5, 219, 
220, etc. Stress is laid on the rugged- 
ness of Thucydides, in § 48 and else- 
where 

Tisias the pupil of Corax, p. 2 

Title of the 7. épu. See pp. 61—63, 
and both facsimiles 

Tragedy. A ‘sportive tragedy’ almost 
a contradiction in terms, § 169, p. 
306 

‘Transitive verbs. 
pp: 248, 297 

Trench, Archbishop. 
proverbs, p. 262 

Trimeter. The New Comedy uses the 
trimeter, § 204. Cp. pp. 246, 306 

Types of Style. See under ‘style,’ p. 
325 supra; also pp. 29—34. In one 
and the same writer the elevated, 
elegant and forcible styles may exist 
side by side; but the elevated and 
the plain types are mutually exclu- 
sive, § 37 

‘Tyrants. Various references to, §§ 237, 
289—294, p- 258 


Also pp. 16, 


Used intransitively, 


His book on 


Usage. Usage as the sovereign arbiter, 
88 86, 91. Cp. pp. 229, 255, 304, 
395 


Varro and the types of style, p. 25 

Vaulted roof. The members of a period 
are like the stones which support a 
vaulted roof, § 13 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Verse. Metrical cadences to be used 
with caution in prose, §§ 118, 180— 
185. Prose has its ‘members,’ cor- 
responding to the measures of verse, 
81 

Vividness (realism). This quality de- 
scribed and illustrated in connexion 
with the plain style of which it is so 
essential an element, §§ 208—220. 
Cp. p- 279 

Vowels. Long vowels render style im- 
pressive, § 39. Concurrence of vowels 
contributes to elevation of style, §§ 
68—73; but must be avoided in the 
plain style, ὃ 207. See also under 
‘Egypt,’ Ρ- 320 supra 


Waits-Dunton, Theodore: pp. 35, 36 

Wit. 
τραπελία, and χάρις on pp. 269, 272, 
283, 308. Wit and buffoonery: how 
they differ, § 168 

Words. Order of words in the elevated 
and the plain styles, §§ 50—53, 
109-201. Rugged words may pro- 
duce elevation, §§ 49, 105. Com- 
pound words can be used effectively 
in the elevated and the forcible 
styles, §§ g1, 92, 275; but should be 
avoided in the plain style, ὃ 1οῖ. 
Formation of new words, §§ 94—98, 
Pp- 297,298. Dithyrambiccompounds 
cause frigidity, § 116. Kinds of words 
distinguished by musicians, § 176. 
Picturesque words, § 276.—For a list 
of words occurring only in the 7. ἑρμ.» 
see p. 57 (together with the Notes 
and Glossary) 

Wordsworth: pp. 44, 232 


References under ἀστεῖσμός, ev- 


Xenophon. See the references in Index 
II. and also §§ 37, 80, 155, 181, 296 


Il. INDEX OF AUTHORS AND PASSAGES QUOTED IN THE 
DE ELOCUTIONE. 


The thick numerals refer to the sections in which the quotations are found. 


Aeschines (the Orator) Cées. 133, 267; 
202, 268 

Aeschines Socraticus /vagm., 205 

Aleaeus Fragm. 39, 142 

Alcidamas /ragm., 116 

Anacreon fragm. 62, 5 

Antiphon fragm. 50, 53 

Antisthenes /ragm. 67, 249 

Archedemus /vag7z., 34 

Archilochus fragm. 89, 5; 94, 5 

Aristophanes Ach. 86, 161; Vb. 149, 
179, 152; 401, 150 

Aristotle “ef. 111. 8, 38; 111. 9, 11, 34; 
lil. ri, 81. Alzst. Anim. ii. 973 ix. 
157. Fragmm. 71, 28; 609, 233; 615, 
225; 618, 97, 144, 164; 619, 29, 154; 
620, 230 


Cleitarchus Fragm., 304 

Cleobulina frag. 1, 102 

Crates Fragm. 7, 259 

Ctesias Fragmm. 20, 21, 213; 36, 216 


Demades /ragmim., 283, 284, 285 

Demetrius Phalereus -ragm. 7, 289 

Demosthenes A7istocr. 99, 31, 248 (cp. 
n. on p. 217). De Cor. 3, 253; 18, 
299; 71, 279; 136, 80,272; 179, 270; 
188, 273; 265,250. De Falsa Leg. 
421, 277; 424, 280; 442, 269. Left. 
init., 10, 11, 20, 245, 246. Philipp. 
ill. 26, 263 

Dicaearchus Hragm. 33, 182 


Epicharmus /vagm. 147, 24 
Euripides /ox 161,195; Meleag. fragm., 
58 


Hecataeus Fragm. 332, 2, 12 
Herodotus i. 1 init., 17, 44; 1. 203, 66 
Hesiod Of. et D. 40, 122 
Hippocrates Aphorism. i. 1, 4, 238 
Homer Ziad ii. 497, 54, 257; 11. 671, 
61; iv. 126, 81; iv. 443, 124; vi. 152, 
200; ΙΧ. 502, 7; ix. 526, 25; x. 436, 
124; xii. 113, 111; ΧΙ]. 208, 255; xiii. 
339, 82; xill. 798, 64, 81; xiv. 433, 
56; xvi. 161, 94, 220; xvi. 358, 48, 
105; xx. 218, 79; xxi. I, 56; xxi. 
257, 209; xxi. 388, 83; xxii. 133, 189; 
ΧΧΙΠ. 116, 219; xxiil. 154, 57; xxiii. 
379, 210. Odyssey ili. 278, 150; v. 
203, 57; vi. 105, 129; ix. 190, 52; 
ix. 289, 219; ix. 369, 130, 152, 262; 
1X. 394, 94; ΧΙ. 595, 72; ΧΙ]. 73, 60; 
XVI. 220, 575 xix. 7, 107; xix. 172, 
113; xix. 518, 133; xxi. 226, 57 


Isocrates Azc. Hel. 17, 23. 
1, 25; 58, 22 


Panegyr. 


Lyric. Fragmm. Adesp. 126, 143; 128, 
91, 262; Bergk p. 742, 151 

Lysias Zratosth. ad init., 190; Fragmm. 
5, 128; 275, 128, 262 


Menander /7agm. 230, 194 


328 


Plato Huthyd. 271 A, 226. Menex. 
246 Ὁ, 266. Phaed. 59 C, 288. 
Phaedr. 246 £, 66. Politicus 269 C, 
5. Protag. 312 A, 218. ep. i. init., 
21, 206 ; iil. 399 Ὁ, 185; iii. 411 A, B, 
51, 183, 184, Z£pist. 7, 290 


Sappho /ragmm. gt, 148; 92, 146; 
94, 106; 95, 141; 109, 140; 
162 ; 123, 127, 162 

Sophocles 777f/ol. fragm., 114 

Sophron /ragmm. 24, 151; 32, 147; 
34, 127; 52, 151; 68, 156; 108, 
127; 110, 156 

Sotades /ragm., 189 


122, 


Theognis /vagm., 85; cp. n. on p. 
228 supra 

Theophrastus /ragmm. (1. 
41, 114, 173, 222 


λέξεως), 


DEMETRIUS ON STYLE 


Theopompus /ragm. 249, 27, 247 

Thucydides i. 1 init., 44; i. 5, 25; 
i. 24, 72,199; ii. 48, 39; ii. 49, 48; 
li. 102, 45, 202, 206; iv. 12, 65; 
iv. 64, 113; vi. 1, 72 


Xenophon 47zad. i. 1 init., 3, 19; 1. 2, 
21, 198; i. 2, 27, 1389; 1. 5, 2, 93; 
i. 8. 10, 104; i. 8, 18, 84; i. 8, 20, 
103; ili. 1, 31, 187; iv. 4, 3, 6, 121; 
ν. 2, 14, 98; vi. 1, 13, 131. Cyrop. 
1. 4, 21, 89, 274; xi. 2, 15, 134 


Scriptores Incerti 17, 18, 26, 42, 63, 
70, 115, 116, 117, 121, 126, 138, 145, 
149, 158, 161, 187, 188, 196, 207, 
211, 217, 236, 237, 238, 239, 257, 
258, 265, 281, 296, 302. Cp. p. 216 


CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY J. AND C. F. CLAY, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 


BY THE SAME EDITOR. 


Dionysius of Halicarnassus: the Three Literary Letters. 
The Greek text edited with English Translation, Facsimile, Notes, Glossary 
of Rhetorical Terms, Bibliography, and Introductory Essay on Dionysius as a 
Literary Critic. Cambridge University Press, rgo1. Demy 8vo. gs. 


Extracts from Reviews. 


‘Rhys Roberts hat durch seine Untersuchungen iiber die Schrift περὶ ὕψους, 
iiber Cacilius von Calacte τι. ἃ. sich als tiichtigen Kenner der rhetorisch-kritischen 
Schriftstellerei der Augusteischen Zeit bewahrt. Dionys wird S. 1—49 als ein 
“literary critic’? behandelt. Roberts bietet in dieser Einleitung, die zugleich als 
eine Einftthrung in das ganze Corpus der opuscula rhetorica gelten soll, in seiner 
Art zum erstenmal eine zusammenfassende Wiirdigung der Schriftstellerei des 
Dionys und eine gedrangte Inhaltsangabe der opuscula, besonders von περὶ 
συνθέσεως und von den drei hier veroffentlichten Briefen...... Die gegeniiberstehende 
englische Uebersetzung, die dem Verfasser begreiflicherweise grosse Schwierig- 
keiten machte, ist geschmackvoll und klar; sie hat nicht die Harten und das 
Geschraubte der meisten Uebersetzungen, ohne deshalb dem Original untreu zu 
werden...... Es ist mit Dank anzuerkennen, dass die von Roberts gebotenen 
Parallelen und Erklarungen zum richtigen Verstandniss der Terminologie der 
griechischen und romischen Rhetorik ein gut Teil beisteuern. Auch das chrono- 
logische Verzeichniss der Ausgaben der rhetorischen opuscula und der einschlagi- 
gen Einzelschriften ist eine willkommene Beigabe; ebenso die Indices der Namen, 
Stellen und griechischen Worter...... So hat Roberts, der die einschlagige Litteratur, 
besonders auch die deutsche, mit anerkennenswerter Sicherheit beherrscht, durch 
seine sch6ne Ausgabe der drei ‘“ Litteraturbriefe”” des Dionys das Verstandniss des 
Rhetors gefordert und zur Aufhellung der Geschichte litterarasthetischer Kritik 
nicht wenig beigetragen. —Professor G. AMMON (author of De Déonysti Halicarnas- 
sensts librorum rhetoricorum fontibus) in the Wochenschraft fiir klassische Philologie. 


‘En présentant année par année un tableau synoptique des vies de Démosthene 
et d’Aristote avec l’indication des Olympiades et des archontes et avec tous les 
renvois nécessaires aux pages de l’édition, M. Roberts a fait un travail extréme- 
ment commode et précieux. Je ne saurais trop non plus le remercier d’avoir fait 
suivre le commentaire d’un glossaire des termes de rhetorique et de grammaire: il 
y a la 26 pages qui seront consultées avec fruit méme pour la lecture des autres 
opuscules et traités. Enfin l’édition se termine par une Bibliographie et des Index. 
La Bibliographie embrasse tous les écrits de rhétorique et de critique de Denys: 
editions et dissertations ou articles de revues sont soigneusement relevés et cata- 
logués ; c’est un travail absolument neuf et auquel devront désormais se référer 
tous ceux qui s’occuperont de Denys...... Ajoutons en terminant que l’exécution 
typographique de ce volume est de tout premier ordre, tres agréable a l’ceil et tres 
correcte. Denys est un auteur assez ardu: il était bon d’en rendre l’étude aussi 
attrayante que possible. —M. Max. EGGER (author of Denys ad’ Halicarnasse: 
Lssai sur la critique littératre et la rhétorique chez les Grecs au stécle da’ Auguste) in 
the Bulletin Critique. 


‘Il Roberts, che, poco tempo addietro, pubblico in bella e lodata edizione la 
famosa opera attribuita a Longino sz/ sublime, prosegue degnamente et seriamente 
la sua impresa pubblicando tre dissertazioni, in forma di lettera, di Dionisio di 
Alicarnasso, concernenti anch’ esse la critica retorica e letteraria; e pare che non 
qui si fermera ’ opera del Roberts......Ma continuando nel bel sistema adottato nel 
volume del Longino, anche qui il Roberts aggiunge qualche studio speciale, per 
mettere in luce la posizione di Dionisio come critico...... Si potrebbero addurre 
numerosi esempi a provare che il Roberts procede con buoni criterii, ma qui basti 
dire che gli esempi della pagina citata, la prima del testo, corrispondono a quello 


EXTRACTS FROM REVIEW S—continued. 


che il Roberts ha fatto in tutto il suo lavoro, che é buono ed utile ed é arra di 


buona ed utile continuazione.’—Professor C. O. ZURETTI in the Bollettino di 
Filologia Classica. 


‘An excellent edition of 7.16 Three Literary Letters of Dionysius of Halicar- 
nassus is the most recent work of a careful and elegant scholar, Dr W. Rhys 
Roberts, who has previously edited Longinus on the Sublime...... The absence of 
positive reference by Dionysius either to Cicero or to any other Latin writer, is well 
discussed by the editor in his estimate of his author ‘‘as a literary critic.” The 
editorial work is consummate throughout...... A writer in the Quarterly Review, 
No. 384, in order to exalt the merits of Longinus, finds it necessary to depreciate 
Dionysius. Dr Rhys Roberts has put it in the power of any classical reader to 
refute this unjust estimate.’—Dr HENRY HayYMAN in the Critical Review. 


“We observe, therefore, with much satisfaction, that the whole subject of 
Greek criticism is being taken in hand by so sound and thorough a scholar as 
Mr Rhys Roberts, and we heartily welcome the instalment of his work that has 
recently appeared in his excellent edition of ‘‘ The Three Literary Letters of 
Dionysius of Halicarnassus.” Dionysius is an admirable critic, manly, searching, 
sane, yet capable (as his appreciation of Demosthenes shows) of genuine en- 
thusiasm...... A better example of the value of criticism, based on definite principles 
and directed towards a definite end, than the works of Dionysius cannot be found.’ 
—Quarterly Review (No. 386). 

‘Professor Roberts is prudently conscious of his author’s gifts, and he has given 
us an edition of his three letters which for intelligence and scholarship is beyond 
censure. But he will add greatly to our obligation if he will print us the famous 
treatise Περὶ συνθέσεως ὀνομάτων, of which we should welcome a scholarly edition. 
For in this treatise Dionysius reviews and attempts to explain the art of literature. 
It is a brilliant effort to analyse the sensuous emotions produced by the harmonious 
arrangement of beautiful words. Its eternal truth might make it a text-book for 
to-day.’ —Spectator. 


‘Tn this volume every scholar will welcome with pleasure a right worthy com- 
panion to the author’s previous edition of Longinus ‘‘On the Sublime.” Both are 
parts of a wider editorial plan, which, after the appearance of Demetrius’ ‘‘ De 
Elocutione,” will culminate in a critical edition of Aristotle’s “ Rhetoric” and a 
“‘ History of Greek Literary Criticism.” The present work only confirms the 
general verdict which, on the publication of Longinus, was passed both in England 
and on the Continent, that none is better qualified than Prof. Roberts to carry so 
ambitious a scheme to a successful completion...... A most excellent English trans- 
lation is given of the three literary letters, and none but those who have endeavoured 
to translate Dionysius without such assistance can either realise the difficulty of 
finding proper English equivalents for the technical terms of Greek literary criticism 
or fully appreciate the ability with which the editor has accomplished both the 
translation and the compilation of the invaluable glossary which is issued as an 
appendix. The notes are scholarly and not too long ; the text has had the benefit 
of a careful recollation of the Paris MS. by the editor; and the introductory essay, 
which reviews the whole critical work of Dionysius and estimates his position and 
value, is concise, temperate, and masterly.’—/Journal of Education. 


‘English scholarship, already under a debt to Dr Rhys Roberts for his edition 
of ‘‘Longinus on the Sublime,” is laid under a further obligation through the 
appearance of this new work. It is amazing that the critical essays of Dionysius 
have so little attracted the attention of English scholars, but we may safely con- 
clude that Dr Rhys Roberts’ general introduction will quicken the desire to see the 
rest of Dionysius’ extant works worthily edited...... There is no trace of effort in 
the translation. Even the reader who is innocent of Greek could relish the letters 
in their English dress. An introductory essay on Dionysius as a literary critic, the 
Greek text, a translation, a glossary, and a bibliography combine to make the 
volume singularly complete. —Chzrch Times. 


‘The translation which accompanies the Greek text in parallel pages is very 
excellent, both faithful and idiomatic; while the introductory essay is scholarly, 


EXTRACTS FROM REVIEWS—continued. 


unassuming, and replete with all necessary information. Altogether, the editing 
leaves nothing to be desired.’—Academy. 


‘Along with Professor Lindsay’s edition of the Caftivz, this book does great 
credit to English scholarship. By his edition of the treatise Ox the Sublime, and 
by many articles in magazines, Professor Roberts has marked out the Greek literary 
critics as his demesne...... He has produced a work not only indispensable to 
sttidents of Greek but also readable to a much wider circle. His introductory 
essay is excellent in matter and in manner; his translation is always successful and 
often brilliant; his notes and glossary show comprehensive and careful scholar- 
ship. —Cambrzdge Review. 

* An introductory essay passes the whole literary production of the great critic 
under review. This is well done, and supplies a need seriously felt by English 
students...... The book will be justly welcomed by the increasing number of scholars 
interested in ancient literary criticism. —-Oxford Magazine. 


‘The editor has done excellently an important piece of work—one which ranks 
worthily with his edition of the ‘‘ De Sublimitate ” and which augurs well for the 
editions promised in his preface...... Mr Roberts’ introductory essay is admirable.’ 
—Pilot. 


‘We cannot speak too highly of the manner in which Professor Roberts has 
performed the task of editing these letters for English scholars....The task of 
understanding the often difficult text is made easy by an admirable translation.’ 
Educational Times. 


‘Two years ago we reviewed Professor Roberts’ excellent edition of ‘‘ Longinus 
on the Sublime,” and after a thorough examination of his ‘‘ Dionysius of Halicar- 
nassus,” we can testify that it is worthy to rank with its predecessor as far as the 
editor’s work is concerned. The text has been carefully edited, after a new colla- 
tion of the Paris MS., and Professor Roberts’ minute knowledge of the language 
of this and kindred works has enabled him to make what is probably a better 
recension than any of his predecessors....... The translation is lucid and idiomatic, 
and we think even better than the Longinus. But the introductory essay, which 
takes into account the other critical works of Dionysius, is the most original part 
of the book....... This book is the second of a series of Greek critical works which 
are meant to prelude a comprehensive ‘“‘ History of Greek Literary Criticism.” 
The value of this attempt to make us see the Greek writers through Greek 
eyes can hardly be overrated; and Professor Roberts has again earned the grati- 
tude not only of scholars but of all who are interested in fine literature. — 
Literature. 


“We are always glad to see such thorough, well-equipped editions as this 
proceeding from the University Presses....... Ease of style is more the gift of 
Oxford than Cambridge, but it is pleasant to find that Professor Roberts’ trans- 
lation is not lacking in so essential a quality.’.—/Votes and Queries. 


‘We welcome this splendid edition of the three literary letters of Dionysius 
of Halicarnassus by Professor Roberts, which is meant to serve as a companion 
volume to his ‘‘ Longinus on the Sublime,” a work which is already well-known 
on the Continent.’ Pall Mall Gazette. 


‘Writers and speakers of the present day might do far worse than get the book 
and study the words of this very eminent critic and stylist of the days of Augustus. 
It is no slight aid to the acquisition of style to have the methods of the masters of 
antiquity—Homer, Herodotus, Demosthenes, and Thucydides—analysed by one 

_ who spoke their own tongue.’ —S? James's Gazette. 


‘Last year we were indebted to Professor Rhys Roberts, of Bangor, for the 
first adequate edition of Longinus; and now we have to welcome a fresh effort, 
designed on the same general plan, and likely to add not a little to the reputation 
already so justly acquired for the writer both here and on the Continent....... The 
translation, while closely following the Greek original, is yet a model of lucid and 
vigorous English. —Dazly News. 


‘Every student of Greek who wishes thoroughly to understand -the formal 
aspects of its literature must read this writer, and he could not be read in a 


EXTRACTS FROM REVIEWS—continued. 
better edition. The work is worthy of its place beside its editor’s ‘* Longinus,” 
and will substantially enrich any classical library.’ —Scotsman. 


‘Professor Roberts has conferred an immense benefit upon all serious students 
of Greek by his scholarly and exhaustive editions of the great Greek literary 
CHIGICS Sears In taking up Dionysius, Professor Roberts, so far at least as British 
editors are concerned, almost enters upon virgin soil.’— Glasgow Herald. 


‘Le docteur a fait précéder ces lettres d’une introduction fort savante. C’est 
une étude complete sur Denys, faite avec des documents trés riches, et un goit 
exquis. Tous les écrits littéraires sont analysés, discutés, jugés avec compétence 
et sagacité....... La traduction présentait de grandes difficultés ἃ cause des termes 
techniques si nombreux dans ces lettres. Autant que nous pouvons juger d’une 
langue qui n’est pas la nétre, ces difficultés sont heureusement résolues. La 
traduction est claire et élégante....Mais ce qui est appréciable surtout, c’est le 
glossaire. Il y a la des trésors d’érudition. Les amateurs de la langue grecque 
se délecteront a parcourir ces petites observations sur les mots employés dans 
ces lettres. La plupart de ces mots fournissent a l’éditeur l'occasion de faire 
des rapprochements ingénieux, des études souvent profondes, et de nous initier 
a tous les secrets de la langue grecque. —M. PH. GONNET (Professor of Greek in 
the University of Lyons) in the Uz7verstté Catholique. 


‘M. Rhys Roberts continue, avec un zele des plus louables, la tache quwil 
a entreprise avec l’assentiment et le concours de l'Université de Cambridge. 
Apres le Zraité du sublime, dont il a publié un bon texte en 1899 (Revue critique, 
1g00, I, p. 323), il nous donne aujourd'hui les trois lettres litteraires de Denys 
d’Halicarnasse, et annonce une édition prochaine du περὶ ἑρμηνείας faussement 
attribué a Démétrius de Phalere. Cette triple publication n’est d’ailleurs, dans 
la pensée de l’auteur, que la préface de travaux plus importants, tels qu’une 
édition annotée de la RAétorigue d’Aristote et une Histoire de la critique littératre 
en Gréce. Pour mener a bonne fin une ceuvre aussi vaste, M. Roberts a toutes 
les qualités requises de science et de conscience. I] connait et utilise avec dis- 
crétion tous les ouvrages qui touchent a son sujet; il établit correctement le texte 
qw il doit étudier; il montre dans sa traduction une précision élégante et simple; 
dans ses notes, une sobriété assez rare chez les éditeurs anglais; dans sa préface 
enfin, un gotit délicat et sir. Son jugement sur Denys d’Halicarnasse, pour faire 
une large place a l’éloge, n’a pourtant rien d’aveugle; c’est l’opinion raisonnée 
d’un esprit juste et pondéré, En outre, M. Roberts a le mérite d’offrir aux tra- 
vailleurs, sous la forme d’un glossaire, un excellent exposé de Ja langue de la 
rhetorique et de la critique chez Denys d’Halicarnasse; trois index, sans parler 
dune longue notice bibliographique, achevent ce volume, qui sera bien accueilli de 
tous les hellénistes. —M. AMEDEE HAUVETTE (Professor of Greek in the University 
of Paris) in the Revue critique αἱ histoire et de littérature. 


ALSO PUBLISHED BY THE CAMBRIDGE 
UNIVERSITY PRESS. 


The Ancient Boeotians: their Character and Culture, and 
their Reputation. By W. Ruys Roperts, M.A. With a Map, a Table 
of Dates, and a List of Authorities. 1895. Demy 8vo. 55. 


Chapters on the Aims and Practice of Teaching. Edited 
by FREDERIC SPENCER, M.A., Phil.Doc. (Including a chapter on the 
Teaching of Greek by ΝΥ. Ruys Roberts, M.A.) First edition, 1897 ; 
second edition, 1899. Crown 8vo. 6s. 


Longinus on the Sublime. The Greek Text edited after the 
Paris Manuscript, with Introduction, Translation, Two Facsimiles, and Four 
Appendices (Textual, Linguistic, Literary, and Bibliographical), by W. Rrys 
Roperts, M.A. 1899. Demy 8vo. gs. 


Mitt ' 6) Lf ὦ 
oe pias. κοι 
ae ΓῚ ΠΣ ΓΕ 
i Ἢ 58 
FER 1 1°30 
Fabs SLA 
Cc | 
Géhe {ci : 
Ὀερι 5°34910 Ἵ ᾿ 
G AR eb lS : 
CARAug91’39 | 
ξξ ΘΟθῇ vor 
HEF ἢ 6 89 


888.9 psr7g 


7 επεύτιυβ (ad.Roheste) Ὁ 
On St | 


tyle- 


| 


} 


88.9 D3775 414323 


wii 


ii 


6 


si ecesvpenet 


Ae me τὰ σφ οι δῷ Bins menimrd 


eye 


vr 


